What is the point of the Religious Civics?

[Pazyryk]

I find Orbis incredibly well polished, with a lot of interesting, "hard-choice" decisions to make compared to base FFH (e.g., in the redesigned tech tree).

However, I can't quite figure out the point to the Religious Civic category. The main game play effect seems to be that I have to change religion and civic together...so 2 turns of revolt instead of 1. Except maybe for Slumbering Coven (-2 happy), isn't it ALWAYS a good idea to take the civic corresponding to the religion (as opposed to Neutrality)? In base FFH, if I am FoL, I have to choose between Agriculture and Guardian of Nature. I might actually prefer Ag early when I'm trying to grow cities. But now, is there any reason ever not to take Guardian of Nature under any circumstances? (Yes, I know you need another tech for some of the religious civics, but couldn't this new benefit be tied to a building or the tech directly without a no-choice civic category.)

I do like some of the flavor and balance added by some of these. For example, the corp bonus of Shadow Court can be very effective (making up for other weaknesses of CoE) and flavorful. However, can't this be added to the religion without using up a civic slot? I guess my main complaint here is that there is no hard decision in these, no strange and surprising combos (Vampire republic, etc.), so why include them at all? My secondary complaint is that the whole religious civic category suffers from an excess of parallelism (something Kael intentionally avoided to very good effect in FFH). Just because 3 religions have civics doesn't mean they all have to.

</rant> (runs for cover)

 

[Opera]

Hmmm...

I don't know why they're this way; but now that you mention it, it does really feel like easy choices. Your suggestion, and, if I were to change this, my suggestion, would be to take away the Religion CivicOption and spread its civics through all other options?

So, we could have Guardian of Nature in Labor, Shadow Court in Government, Enlightment in... Cultural Values?, Slumbering Coven in Labor, Sacrifice the Weak in Economy, etc.? This is a raw idea, I just thought about the names of the options, not about what other civics are in it too.

Anyway, I think it may be a good idea. Involving interesting choices is always great. And since we mention that, it is also why I would like the initial civics to not suck.

My secondary complaint is that the whole religious civic category suffers from an excess of parallelism (something Kael intentionally avoided to very good effect in FFH). Just because 3 religions have civics doesn't mean they all have to.

I remember having the same thought. I'm not sure what to do with it. I'm thinking "screw you, damn thought!" because I like that each religion enables a civic. But there may be other answers...

 

[ZHONN]

I too agree that the religious civic panel on its own isn't such a good idea. Religious civics are a good idea and having them mixed with the other civics like Opera suggested should be good, but even then the religious civics should always be somewhat comparable to the regular civics so that one doesn't always go straight for the religious civic instead of the mundane ones.

 

[Opera]

I really have trouble placing the civics in other categories... Feels like I'm placing all in Labor Here are my thoughts:

Arete --> Labor: because it makes sense and make it so all "can hurry/can spend gold" civics are in the same category;

Guardian of Nature --> Legal: so it can't be combined with Social Order and can't have maintenance modifiers;

Purity --> Government: not sure why but this civic shouldn't have +1 per religion in each city, seems silly, given the name of the civic...

 

[Ahwaric]

I have quite simillar feelings. The category seems a bit artificial to me.
I thought you liked it at first Opera ?
If there are people that like religious civics as they are now, please let me know before I change it. It will not be in patch g (which I hope to release today), but might happen soon.

Anyway, if we get rid of the category, here is what I think of the civics

Neutrality - gone (no need for it)
Sacrifice the weak - cultural values (? in base FfH but religion is strong)
Slumbering coven - gone/legal? (strong religion but I like the civic)
Shadow court - legal/economy (religion often considered weak, should have some extra and I like the civic)
Guardian of nature - economy (economy in base FfH though the religion is powerfull)
Arete - labor (labor in base FfH, strong religion)
Enlightement - cultural values (should be in, empyrean can use empowerement)
Purity - gone/cultural values? (strong religion)
Humanism - gone/cultural values (will it be needed if other civics are balanced? But I want no state religion civic somewhere)

Seems that balance was not a guideline for creating religion civics in base FfH. 3 of 5 "first" religions have civic, but neither CoE or Empy (introduced later) have one - and these are often considered weaker than other religions
All the civics would probably be nerfed. Also, I will chec what can be moved somewhere else. I do not like to many civics and forcefull fitting civics into a category.
Also, if you think some civics should go, name them. I can always transfer nice things to normal civics.

</rant> (runs for cover)

As you can see, it is safe to stop hiding

 

[Opera]

I have quite simillar feelings. The category seems a bit artificial to me.
I thought you liked it at first Opera ?

Ah, quite putting all the shame on me! I liked it, yeah, but now I've been mutated by Xienwolf Mana and Ahwaric Mana, can't do much about it!

If there are people that like religious civics as they are now, please let me know before I change it. It will not be in patch g (which I hope to release today), but might happen soon.

Nifty! For the patch, I mean

A thought before beginning: shouldn't all cultural values be adoptable at the start by some civilization? I mean, if we had some in CV that requires a religion and thus that no one starts with, wouldn't it defeat the purpose of this category?

Neutrality - gone (no need for it)

Yeah, of course. I always said it was useless!

Sacrifice the weak - cultural values (? in base FfH but religion is strong)

This one can't go as the lesser food required is really interesting. I have trouble placing it too, though.

Slumbering coven - gone/legal? (strong religion but I like the civic)

Yeah, I like it too! Anyway, I like all the civics, so I would prefer it if they weren't removed at all. Nerfed is ok though.

Shadow court - legal/economy (religion often considered weak, should have some extra and I like the civic)

Why not in Goverment? It seems like it should be in Government.

Guardian of nature - economy (economy in base FfH though the religion is powerfull)

Like I said, I see this one in Legal rather.

Arete - labor (labor in base FfH, strong religion)

I agree here.

Enlightement - cultural values (should be in, empyrean can use empowerement)

See above for my thoughts on CV.

Purity - gone/cultural values? (strong religion)

Don't know where to put it

Humanism - gone/cultural values (will it be needed if other civics are balanced? But I want no state religion civic somewhere)

And it can be a nice thing for non-religion civs.

 

[Fluesterwitz]

I like the (intended?) effect, that RCs tend to entrench a state religion, thus making tactical switching less prevalent.
Historically, a religion is usually superseded by another one, when those whose rule is supported by a religion percieve they can get a better deal by another cult. Therefore, it is (again usually) mandatory for those ruled to go through the motions of supporting the state religion's public displays. What someone believes in private is secondary for the upkeep of public order. OTOH a policy of enforced conversion, eg. after conquest, often leads to the conservation of the superseded faith as a symbol of -and for- the resistance.

In short, keep the RCs, but make boni for pop-management their main advantage. Also include flavourfull and relevant disadvantages. Shooting from the hip here: Leaves might suffer a slight production malus, Order a financial malus ...

Putting the RCs in other categories might be a good idea, if only to free up space for a new civics caregory.

 

[ExMachina]

I'd prefer either for the religion civics to become a passive effect of the religion itself, or for them to stay the way they are. The religion civics don't really add a choice between civics, but they contribute to a choice between religions. I really wouldn't want the religion civics to just be moved to other civic categories.

 

[Schwarzbart]

I also prever the Religions Civics how Orbis curent handle them over the way the base FFH handle them.

 

[readercolin]

I find that I perfer the religion civics as they are now.

Slumbering coven gives me a good reason to use OO even if I don't have any cities near water (and I'm not focusing on magic, and therefore doing it just to get hemah).

Shadow court would be awsome if I actually used cottages - as it is now, cottages really need to provide +1 food base to be on par with a specialist economy.

Sacrifice the weak is very powerful, and can be enough to make me want to use that religion just for that civic, but it was already in the base game.

Guardian of nature is also quite powerful, but again, it was already in the base game, and with the food changes, it isn't enough to make me want to switch to that just to get that civic, but makes me very happy it is there when I am already using it.

Arete is very useful, and on a very hilly map, I will switch to RoK just for this civic.

Enlightenment is kinda mediocre compared to the the other civics, I don't usually use empy for that.

Purity is probably the worst imo. However, I have switched to order simply to use this if I really needed XP from somewhere for my units and couldn't get it anywhere else.

-Colin

 

[Hansebenger]

I'd prefer either for the religion civics to become a passive effect of the religion itself.....

I like this idea too.

Is this actually possible technically ?

 

[Valkrionn]

Quite possible. You can't actually wrap the effects into the religion itself... Most are only possible via civic. However, you CAN change the civic via python when you change religions, with no unrest penalty... Basically, change religion and your civic is automatically swapped for you.

 

[ExMachina]

Quite possible. You can't actually wrap the effects into the religion itself... Most are only possible via civic. However, you CAN change the civic via python when you change religions, with no unrest penalty... Basically, change religion and your civic is automatically swapped for you.

Something like that would work. Or perhaps the religion civics could just have zero turns of unrest when you change them? That'd probably be the easiest implementation.

 

[Valkrionn]

I'm not entirely sure that's possible... Although I've only added a single civic, so I'm not that well versed in that area.

I know you can INCREASE the unrest time, but I'm not sure you can set it to 0.

 

[Lord Yanaek]

I'm not sure, but i think i've had zero turns unrest with council civic changes in the past (with non spiritual leaders). It's no longer true however.

Concerning the religious civics, i'm not sure they need to be changed (and i'm not sure i like the idea of them being changed). I can understand the OP's point of view, however as was pointed by other people, i think the religious civics are part of the religion effect, as such, the choice is to made when you decide to go for a religion or another, not whether you should adopt your religion unique civic or not. I know it's different in the current base FFH, but at the beginning (FFH1 and i think early FFH2), there was a religious civic too. I never really understood why they went away with this category.

The 2 turns anarchy doesn't bother me either. Changing religion shouldn't be easy. There should be a cost at doing so. It's another choice to be made. Will you adopt a temporary religion, knowing it will cost you anarchy later, and if so, will you adopt the religious civic, or not to save you more anarchy later. I think the only issue is when you go from no religion to your first religion. If the religious civic can be made 0 turns anarchy, or auto-adopted however, it's fine with me.

 

[Jagenfox]

Doesn't being in a Golden Age give you 0 turns unrest when changing civics?

 

[arcticnightwolf]

Doesn't being in a Golden Age give you 0 turns unrest when changing civics?

Yep

10chars