What you think about Byzantine?

You can go the 3-building route, but if you aggressively push your Religion, choosing an extra Follower belief gives that ability to everyone around you. An extra Founder belief stays with just you.

In theory, having an extra follower belief means a (previously heathen) AI wants your religion more, and once they get it in one city they'll spend what faith they have to actively spread it to their other cities, meaning you get extra free religious pressure which feeds the one founder belief you do have.

In practice, probably none of this happens, so yeah, founder is usually best.
 
Rattlejaw: Depending on difficulty and opponents, I have a couple of different strategies, but the overall one is most definitely two Founder beliefs. Tithe plus another is the likely story.

You can go the 3-building route, but if you aggressively push your Religion, choosing an extra Follower belief gives that ability to everyone around you. An extra Founder belief stays with just you.

Two passive spread beliefs is probably the next-best option. Primary reason to do this is because it's also the only way to grab a spread belief before your 2nd Great Prophet.

Cheers, thanks.

I'm totally unsold on three-building culture. Just getting two buildings was bad enough on Immortal--and that with Mayans, who have far better faith generation and the possibility of a fast enhance through a GP--that I think the whole three-building Sacred Sites strategy is pretty much only for Prince/King. Plus, as you say, you're also handing Sacred Sites and the buildings to everybody else who takes your religion, and if it happens to spread to someone who also went culture and got a few key wonders you've got problems ... and that in turn means you don't want to spread it, which means you're a bit limited as far as founder beliefs go. (No missionary discount or available faith for Interfaith Dialogue, no significant spread for any of the beliefs that reward you for successfully spreading, etc., etc.) Sacred Sites is not good.
 
This is flat-out not true. I have played several games with Isabella where there were no Natural Wonders on my starting continent

Well, this never happened to me, and I do play Isabella quite frequently. I thought of it as impossible. Might be because of gaming configuration (I usually play continents on huge or large setting)

This is true of any Civ with mounted UUs. While Theodora is minorly inconvenienced by no horses (the Cataphract being the least useful unique trait of the Civ), think of what happens if Mongolia can't get Horses. Kinda pathetic, no?

Well, indeed it is. But you blatantly ignore many aspects of my argument. It is much easier to acquire horses for a Knight UU than for horseman. Be it by settling near the resource or by acquiring city-state alliance. And in the Mongols case, their starting bias for plains make it easier for horses to spawn near them.

This is most likely an issue of player skill rather than luck. And, again, this is exactly true of Dido as well as Theodora.

No. Dido has a starting bias for coast, while Theodora may just as likely start in the middle of a landsmass. This happens much easier with Theodora. Player skill does come into the fray, but with an unit as early as the dromon, the opportunity window for player skill playing a role gets diminished.


And, again, this is flat-out not true. No other Civ in the game can take two Founding beliefs with their Religion. Sure, any Religion can have Tithe, but only the Byzantine Religion can have Tithe and Pilgrimage (e.g.).

My example was the one using tithe as the bonus. My argument was that there are many civilizations able to generate money in other, more efficient ways. I did not mean there were other civilizations able to get two founder beliefs, and I am still puzzled that was your interpretation. I supose it was a rethorical maneuvre.

I admit that there's some things unique to Theodora. They usually revolve around making a lot of faith (generally with pilgrimage) - and maybe spamming holy sites with cheaper prophets. Now, with BNW, Theodora also has the ability of (better) spamming faith bought buldings that generate tourism. But nearly every other possibility fits a niche already well represented by other civilizations, and getting these (unique) bonuses depend on you getting lucky with leftover beliefs.


All in all I'm not trying to bash Theodora. There are positive aspects. It's just I feel her game is too random, and I do not think many of us find fun in getting a gimped start. For that reason, I tried to point out the many ways you can get gimped with her.
Byzantium needs fixes that make you, at least, more able to use their uniques. Preferably one that does not tip the power scale too much, but makes it harder for you to utterly fail at the start for reasons beyond your control.
 
Rattlejaw: It might be just me, but I don't think Reformation beliefs get attached to a Religion, but a Civilization.

I've executed the Byzantine 3-building strategy a few times, and I've never seen any of my rivals have anything close to the Tourism output they should if they were building those religious buildings. (And, AFAICT, they could.)

I think Sacred Sites is _quite_ good, but that's because of the above. Does anyone know (have proof) whether Reformation beliefs stick to the religion? Because if so, certain Reformation beliefs (Sacred Sites, Jesuit Education) become FAR worse.

headcase: In my games, the AI gets my religion (in religious games) whether they want it or not, and therefore their views on the matter are moot. ;)
 
I thought Theo has a true coastal bias now. It might not take priority over more important ones like Carthage or Venice, but I remember people talking about that being in for BNW.
 
I think Sacred Sites is _quite_ good, but that's because of the above. Does anyone know (have proof) whether Reformation beliefs stick to the religion? Because if so, certain Reformation beliefs (Sacred Sites, Jesuit Education) become FAR worse.

They definitely do. On one of MadDjinn's last LPs, for instance, he was able to buy a Jesuit Education building after having the religion spread his way by an AI.
 
Free Prophet upon Teology sounds like OP, but maybe it is OP enought, i mean many UA looks like OP, so making everyone OP solves the problem.

What i like in free prophet is that you can still mess it up, if you postpone this Teology too much, and beelining Theology isnt such a good idea, since construction/engenering/civil service/Bronze Working are all good and beneficial. Not to mention that too use this Kataphrack we again need Horseraiding.

But more important, it gives a bit of freedom, since now it must be piety, and to be more specific mix of liberty and piety + luck factor of location giving bonus faith. Free prophet just opens some unorthodox opening, like actually using this early units for some offensive and not being forced into religious spam. Or go for religious spam, but use faith for units, or picking pantheon which fits our needs, not have to be one giving bonus faith.

Comparisons who will get religion faster is creating special olympics. Since after Celts and Byzantine figure out who can found religion faster they need still win the game against some real civilization like Arabia, Shoshone, Poland, Maya.

As for UU, if nation have 2 of them they should either be from same era, or from very different one. (like medieval and modern) But for me having more than one is more disadvantage than anything. Byzantine probably would be better with just one UU, and just UB or UI. And if i need to pick probably Greece Fire is more iconic, Cataphrack was formation used by lots of rulers in Asia Minor, im not historican but i would sooner connect Cataphract with Persian, sooner than with some kind of Spearman.

As for "what else Byzantine is know of" i woudl say Justinian Law. (just as very common knowledge).
 
I thought Theo has a true coastal bias now. It might not take priority over more important ones like Carthage or Venice, but I remember people talking about that being in for BNW.

Hmm, that would be a very good change. Wasn't aware of this (haven't played her since Gn'K). In Gn'K, I was always able to get a coastal city, but my start was rarely coastal.


I like the idea, but I've never liked the Byzantines in practice. I'm still of the opinion that the Byzantines (and the Celts, to a lesser degree) both suffer from the same thing: the perceived (expected?) bias of the developers that Religion was going to be very powerful, and that, thus, the Byzantines and Celts necessitated only a carefully measured affinity towards religion.

The actual case is that religion is a nice buff to a civilization that can found one, but is not so game changing that an entire civilization ought to be based around one.

Yeah, agreed completely. I also liked your idea for the Celts and Byzantines on the other post. The things is, Boudicca now is much stronger, with opera houses being needed as soon as you open acoustics. I don't really know if the Celts need an improvement anymore (certainly needed before BNW).

And the Theodosian walls are really good theme. A shame it isn't explored in the game as UA or UB.
 
Well, this never happened to me, and I do play Isabella quite frequently. I thought of it as impossible. Might be because of gaming configuration (I usually play continents on huge or large setting)

I usually play on Large or Huge, of various Landmasses. Believe me, if I was guaranteed a 'near' NW site as Isabella, I'd play her a lot more often than I do (which is a lot).


Well, indeed it is. But you blatantly ignore many aspects of my argument. It is much easier to acquire horses for a Knight UU than for horseman. Be it by settling near the resource or by acquiring city-state alliance. And in the Mongols case, their starting bias for plains make it easier for horses to spawn near them.

Actually, I didn't ignore it. First and foremost, I'm not sure if I've ever BUILT a Cataphract as the Byzantines. This points out two things: they are very lackluster, and they are perfectly superfluous to the Byzantines.

I would also argue that the Dromon makes it more likely to obtain CS Horses by killing Barbs in their territory, but that's a minor case.

Finally, I actually agree that the Cataphract should be a Knight replacement.

I will reiterate, though, that the Cataphract should never be an integral part of Byzantine play. In order of priorities, it should be 1) Dromon, 2) Religion, and about 20) Cataphract.


No. Dido has a starting bias for coast, while Theodora may just as likely start in the middle of a landsmass.

A bias (Venice notwithstanding) does not guarantee a Coastal start. Theodora may not be guaranteed a coastal start, but I think I can count the number of games I have seen Constantinople not on a coast on one hand.

And, unlike Dido, a non-coastal start for Theodora is much less costly. I can build/buy Dromon from any Coastal city, while the free Harbor aspect of Dido's UA becomes a chore if she does not start on the coast.

This happens much easier with Theodora. Player skill does come into the fray, but with an unit as early as the dromon, the opportunity window for player skill playing a role gets diminished.

Um, the Dromon does not get replaced until the Galleass in the middle Medieval period. I don't quite consider that the 'early game'. On that note, the OP's mention of moving the Dromon to Optics makes the window of opportunity to use it _shorter_, not longer. Inexplicably so.

My example was the one using tithe as the bonus. My argument was that there are many civilizations able to generate money in other, more efficient ways. I did not mean there were other civilizations able to get two founder beliefs, and I am still puzzled that was your interpretation. I supose it was a rethorical maneuvre.

It was not rhetorical. You do not seem to prize flexibility. There are very Civs that can 'trade in' or 'tailor' their UA to a certain playstyle. While the Byzantines aren't the best at this (that would probably be the Maya), the Byzantines are even more flexible, and therefore warrants higher risk.

I admit that there's some things unique to Theodora. They usually revolve around making a lot of faith (generally with pilgrimage) - and maybe spamming holy sites with cheaper prophets. Now, with BNW, Theodora also has the ability of (better) spamming faith bought buldings that generate tourism. But nearly every other possibility fits a niche already well represented by other civilizations, and getting these (unique) bonuses depend on you getting lucky with leftover beliefs.

Ironically, not one of these is something _I_ use Theodora, which underscores the point that Theodora's strength is her flexibility.

All in all I'm not trying to bash Theodora.

The OP certainly seemed to. 'Why would you play Theodora?' The answers are there. If those answers don't satisfy someone, go play something else.

There are positive aspects. It's just I feel her game is too random, and I do not think many of us find fun in getting a gimped start. For that reason, I tried to point out the many ways you can get gimped with her.

Sure, and I can get gimped with any other Civ as well.

Byzantium needs fixes that make you, at least, more able to use their uniques. Preferably one that does not tip the power scale too much, but makes it harder for you to utterly fail at the start for reasons beyond your control.

Download the Peristyle mod for Byzantium, and see what happens when you give the Byzantines a Faith UB. And the kicker is that it's NOT that powerful compared to the Shrine. It's almost an impossible point to make.

To me, the Byzantine UA could be changed to 'You are allowed to recruit the Dromon' and give them no other uniques, and they'd still be a good Civ. The Byzantine Civ is a truly transformational Civ. It gets perhaps the only 'mounted infantry' UU in the game, a naval UU that completely changes the way the early Naval game is played, and a UA that gives it the ability to have a very different religion.
 
They definitely do. On one of MadDjinn's last LPs, for instance, he was able to buy a Jesuit Education building after having the religion spread his way by an AI.

Well, then, I certainly will never be taking Sacred Sites or Jesuit Education ever again. :p
 
Free Prophet upon Teology sounds like OP, but maybe it is OP enought, i mean many UA looks like OP, so making everyone OP solves the problem.

Consider that 'Free Prophet upon reaching Theology' is only PART of the Mayan UA, and... :p

What i like in free prophet is that you can still mess it up, if you postpone this Teology too much, and beelining Theology isnt such a good idea, since construction/engenering/civil service/Bronze Working are all good and beneficial. Not to mention that too use this Kataphrack we again need Horseraiding.

Guess I just have to ask: why in the world would you use the Cataphract?

But more important, it gives a bit of freedom, since now it must be piety, and to be more specific mix of liberty and piety + luck factor of location giving bonus faith.


How odd. I must be doing it wrong with opening Honor than going full Faith.

Comparisons who will get religion faster is creating special olympics. Since after Celts and Byzantine figure out who can found religion faster they need still win the game against some real civilization like Arabia, Shoshone, Poland, Maya.

The issue is, really, that 'fast' IS 'best' in the religion game. It's pretty clear from G&K that Celts/Ethiopia/Maya are supposed to be 'fast' Religion, and the Byzantines the 'power' religion... but that's not how the mechanics work.

That points to a very 'simple' fix... simply let the Byzantines choose from all the beliefs in the game, even if already chosen by another Civ. And/or restrict the 'any' choice to the Bonus belief that they get.

I mean, it's not like we don't already have a system like this (Ideological tenets) in the game.
 
. The only change I'd make is to have their Pantheon Faith threshold not increase when other civs found Pantheons. That way there is less of an issue with them not taking advantage of their UA at higher difficulty levels.

bingo! we got a winner
 
Cataphrack - is much better than horsemen when it comes to attack/defense. But also is slower, so it is more like hybrid of swordsman/horseman than just better version. Sometimes it would be great if both classic and UU version are avaiable since they serve different purpose. Still have small window of opportunity after which pikeman makes it obsolete.

Yes, many people have compared Cataphracts to Swordsmen that require Horses instead of Iron. Swordsmen tend to have a worse promotion tree until you Renaissance/Industrial, but mounted do suffer combat penalties against spear and pikemen.

Dromon - is ranged, but have no better stats than Trireme (moreover have worse melee value).

Technically, Triremes have a strength of 10 while Dromons have a strength of 8 (ranged strength of 10). However, you are forgetting that Dromons have an inherent +50% strength against navals, meaning that they have an effective 12 strength against melee attacks (such as if a Trireme attacks it), so actually the Dromon is better in melee than the Trireme.

As soon as galleas enter the game there is no comparison. Again if it was tied to optics as completly different unit than trirema (and classic stats instead of ancient) it would be more interesting. I admit that once used it to conquere another city early on, but im suppose that if i rush Galleas it would be as much if not more effective.

Galleass are extremely slow (movement 3). They have strength 16/17, compared to the Dromon's 8/10, but if you are mainly fighting naval, Dromons are essentially 12/15. When playing Byzantium, I will often forego upgrading to Galleass', and keep Dromons around until I can go directly to Frigates.

Also, Compass comes much, much later than Sailing, and experienced Dromons (with +1 range or logistics) can easily crush newly created Galleass'.

Patriarchate of Constantinople:
It is great that once you found a religion, you can pick 2 beliefs (and not only fallowers) so for example i can secure 2 of my favorite beliefs. However there is a problem that... reigion is not given, more like you must fight for it and have luck with that. Rushing Stonehage, or forcing into Piety is start limitacion. It seems that Byzantine may actually have no UA at all which is interesting.

Many civs may have no UA if the map conditions don't allow it. (No water, certain victory types disabled, settings changed, etc.)

Generally, 2 Founders or 2 Enhanced are the best, IMHO. With BNW, you can actually already effectively get a second Pantheon due to Religious Tolerance, so with Byzantium you can benefit from 3. 3 Followers is great with Sacred Sites if you can snatch 3 building beliefs (which is very unlikely at higher levels). 3 Follower beliefs might also be good for multiplayer.

Also note that if you go with 2 Enhanced, Byzantium usually gives you first choice of the Enhanced, since you get it when you first found a religion.

What you can squize from Byzantine...
From the other side the more belief in religion can have some good use.
Religion Sites are just better with 3 buildings at disposal, but then... you need to be lucky to get 3 religious buildings, and this exacly belief. However this tactic is not limited to Byzantine, and others could perform it just as good. Egypt could have a little easier time with happiness, while Poland could faster got Piety tree finished (and so get Prophet). Mayas can do similar but without need of finishing tree.
On the other note: religious buildings are a little OP when you compare them to hard builded one, even with right belief. like Pagodas vs Religious Center.

Religious buildings can be great, but don't forget that they cost faith. Early on, if you are building religious buildings, your religion will not be spreading as well, compared to other religions that are purchasing missionaries instead.

The other thing is to craft double founder belief and try to be dominant religion, with tithe and peace loving. But im not sure how good it is. Or if Byzantine have a edge here over any other civ with peace loving, and some UA giving gold. Probably Arabia coudl do the same just better.

One nice thing to do is to combine Initiation Rites (main benefits are upfront) with Tithe or Church Property (main benefits are later in the game).

So it seems that Byzantine is just civ with 2 classic era units which are not even impressive, and have no interest in early agression (quite opposite). To get any UA you need to alter your opening, and you are never guarantee you will have desired one, or any at all.

Don't forget that Byzantium's bonus belief gives them extra flexibility (aside from requiring them to get a religion), as opposed to most UA's which are narrow in scope.

What could help:
(it is total SF, but one can dream)

I love Byzantium. I agree it's a bit on the weak side. I wouldn't mind seeing a small bump in power, but it seems unlikely.
 
I love the idea of their costs not increasing with other founded pantheons. Personally, I feel Byzantium is fine as a civ, but I will admit I haven't found much of a use for Dromons, naval supremacy during an era where you'll see the odd exploratory trireme seems a bit useless to me. I'd personally like to see Theodesian walls as a replacement for, well, walls, with a higher base strength and maybe a +2 faith. I feel that, along with cataphracts, would give byzantium the ability to set up a sprawling religious empire in the early game, and defend it as you craft your perfect religion. It tales a lot of the focus off early military supremacy and more onto border defence.
 
As for Dromons, they have some uses. Twice i used it to support my land offensive against enemy costal city. Having composite bowman on both land and seavcould help. As well as using it defensivly to shot from see to melee unit which cant give back in anyway. Of course this is map dependent since we need conflict among same coast. Also naval unit have another slot than land, so you can have in one city both composite bowman and dromon (and worker).

Kataphracts on the other side do not have such a niche. Betwean spearmen/horseman/composite/swordsman do not bring anything special or 'omph'. So probably swaping Kataphracts for some UB would be best.

As for interesting way to help Byzantine have UA at all, it could be added "Palace generates faith basing on capital pop" (like 1/3pop) It would be interesting since otherwise it is beneficial to spam cities for mass faith.
 
Cataphract should replace knight, and Dromon should replace galleass. This will mean they can focus more on religion in the early game. Also, their UA should allow them to always found a religion, even if the 5/6/however many have already been founded. If they simply get more faith, then they have an advantage over the Celts etc; but with this, they aren't guaranteed to get the belief of their choice if the Celts or Ethiopia are in the game.
 
Cataphracts being able to fortify IS their niche, it gives you a nice wall of horses to take hits and shrug them off, either on the defence, or while your archers do the dirty work on an enemy city. In addition to this, they are much more capable of taking advantage of enemies who break formation, allowing you to dispel threats on your empire. I have a bit of a soft spot for them, as I held off both America and Korea (both ahead in tech) by camping them near my frontier cities throughout literally the entire medieval era, and managed to keep settling new lands while fighting a purely defensive war which I couldn't hope to take to my enemies (washington had great wall, though I ended him as soon as I saw the first minuteman.) They remain useful even against a vastly tech superior army.
 
I didn't think much of Byzantines before BNW, but my most recent game randomly made me Byzantine, and the game is actually going quite well. I got the pantheon I needed (incense and wine--and each of my 3 cities have one or the other or both), and got first religion. Cataphracts are killing off barbs and keeping my neighbors (Dido and Gajah Mada) off my back. So far I haven't done much with the Dromons. I'm thinking the game will shape up well for a culture or diplomacy victory.
 
Byzantines are mostly fine. The only change I'd make is to have their Pantheon Faith threshold not increase when other civs found Pantheons. That way there is less of an issue with them not taking advantage of their UA at higher difficulty levels.

Both of the UUs are fine. The Cataphract acts as sort of a hybrid between a Swordsman and a Knight. It's a fine unit for defense. The Dromon is a great weapon for both offense and defense limited by only being useful on the coasts. There's nothing wrong with having great power with limits.

I agree with everything you said here. And Cataphract can actually be used on offense if necessary
 
Back
Top Bottom