Why no religion in civ 5?

[Fluxx]

The implementation of religion was in my opinion a great addition of civilization 4. Though there were obvious flaws with it, the fact that it influenced diplomacy, and gave huge civ changing option like monasteries and temples, but also the other wonders made it great.

What I really did find lacking were the choices of religion. In the grand scheme of things a monotheism or a polytheism were much more important then the religions specific.
What would have happened if christianity, Judaism or the Islam never would have been as big, but the Roman gods would have been worshipped instead?
Or the Babylonian, Egyptian, Indian or Greece gods?

 

[Fife]

I also liked it because if you found a religion, that city becomes a holy city. You can build a wonder there that increses your coming into your treasury... A lot of money made

 

[Zhahz]

I don't think they've said religion is totally out, just not being done like it is in Civ IV.

They've stated that religion a la Civ4 will not be in the game, because they didn't like how it made diplomacy very random and abitrary, depending on which religions spread where.

One of my biggest problems with Civ III was how random "diplomacy" was - civs would go in/out of war and gang up for no real reason at all (except maybe pitifully small bribes).

At least with the religion system in Civ IV there was SOME reason for political alliances and actions. It might not have been perfect but it gave some rhyme or reason to AI behaviors.

I'm looking forward to seeing advancement on the political/diplomatic front - I hope. I wouldn't want to see a return to the chaos from Civ III.

 

[player01]

I want to include the religion system again but I personally think it should be found randomly like random events instead through technologies

 

[Drakarska]

Wow, I'm in agreement with Ahriman? <tips hat> Who says wonders never cease.

Religion was seriously hosed in Civ IV, and definitely needed to be reworked. Kind of glad it won't be a primary factor in V. Lost count of how many times I had to beeline religion just to maintain the status quo.

 

[Fife]

Once you do something once, you know how to do it again.

 

[poom3619]

They say they want more "unhonest, backstabber, harder" diplomacy game. It will not like Civ4 which different religious can cause " -x : We are upset that you are under the sway of heathen religion" and this will cause something like " My god hate you. I hate you. I will crusade you when you turn your back." So ciV you will certainly have to say...
"What are you doing. Why are you attacking me..." General Krukov, Red Alert 3

So if ciV still have religion like cIV. You will think you should wary to everyone who aren't have same religion from your. But WW1, WW2 or something like that prove that religion can't guarrantee you from war.

And last one. Siam's UB is Wat (a.k.a. Buddhist Monastery + Temple) it would be funny if you got Christian Wat...

 

[Headlock]

To me, Jewish Vikings & Muslim Aztecs are no more "weird-feeling" than the Great Wall of England, the Oracle of Tenochtitlan Or the Great Pyramids of Germany. Its all just part of rewriting history. My fear, though, is that they've thrown the baby out with the bathwater-& returned 'religion'-such as it was-to the pointlessness of Civ2 & Civ3 (you know "Polytheism"= Build temple; "Monotheism"= Build Cathedral, & that's it

Aussie.

+1

That is EXACTLY my concern as well.

HDLK

 

[Akkon888]

It's acually a GOOD thing that religion is being taken out of civ for many reasons. One, is that civs like Izzy, will hate you, and invade you CONSTENTLY, and only use religion as an excuse. Another reason is that the religion system is just screwed up. You only have 7 religions (which, in reality, there were thousands), and not even some big minor religions (Prodestent, Reformed, ect...).

What? Aren't those all just sects of Christianity?

I am fine with religion exiting the stage of civ unless it is replaced by other worse features.

 

[anycent]

I REALLY DISAGREE with the remocal of religon.Religon influenced histroy and with out it things would be very diffrent in the Civ IV panfletI got with the game it said religon influenced history we could'ent just leave it out of the game Without religon these things would have never happended,
The Holocaust
The Cruscades
The building of vatican city
Leonardo Di Vincis last supper
The world would be just plain boring.
To hear more about my opinions watch my rant on the link below!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMsUalzCv-8
Special note to frxis put religon back in the game b4 i nevr buy another fraxis product again

 

[Calouste]

Special note to anycent: spell and punctuate properly or I'll never read another one of your posts again.

 

[asix79]

Special note to anycent: spell and punctuate properly or I'll never read another one of your posts again.

I agree. Taking the time to write properly is important.

 

[Thormodr]

I thought religion was an excellent addition to cIV and I was quite disappointed to find that it would essentially be removed for ciV. The social policies don't really address religion at all.

Now I know that religion was not perfect in cIV and clearly had its flaws but "throwing out the baby with the bathwater" was not the solution.

Hopefully they'll introduce religion back in in one of the expansion packs along with espionage.

 

[WillCooper]

Oh, and anycent, dont bump 2 month old threads

 

[fmm]

The problem with religion is that it's hard to represent why you would want to befriend those of the same religion and become enemies with those of different persuasions in game terms. I suppose you could have it so that you gain happiness from war with heathens and cooperation with the true believers, but that's a convoluted solution and would be hard to balance. And you really don't want to just program religious bias into the AI because then when you have real people instead of computer opponents it works completely differently.

So instead they focused on having you write your domestic civil framework; and if it's a bit abstracted at least the choices in the social policy arena make sense: religion makes a happier populace but rationalism makes one more focused on inquiry into this world; autocratic regimes are good at beating the drums of war, but free societies have better specialization of labor, great persons, etc.

 

[EdCase]

Religion was the cause for more invasions and wars than anything in history. So if civ would like to continue to be historically accurate, religion would be in the game and be the sole reason for for wars (in some cases). I'm glad they are changing it though. I think that's the point, we all know how each AI will act so it's time for a surprise and much debate to be taken place on this forum.

I think you misused the word continue. Might I suggest start, as historical accuracy is really not the point of Civ.

 

[padlock]

My theory is that one of the underlying design goals of Civ 5 was to make rival civs play like other human players. In other words, all the other leaders are trying their best to win the game.

Limiting their options based on whether they share religion with their opponents runs counter to that goal.

I believe that that's the reason why sharing common social policies will have no effect on diplomacy with the rival civs as well.

It's also probably a main reason why city states are being introduced, since they now fill the role of providing diplomatic opportunities with entities that aren't trying to win the game.

 

[agoodfella]

As I've stated in a prior thread, the removal of Religion was a total copout and completely ignores the importance Religion has played in the shaping of human civilization as we know it (for good, bad, ugly).

 

[Thyrwyn]

What effects of the Civ IV religion system is missing from Civ V? The religious civics are still in - see Piety; religious buildings are still in - temple has been confirmed; Diplomacy modifiers are out but that mechanic was wonky anyway. Have I missed anything?

 

[SalmonSoil]

What effects of the Civ IV religion system is missing from Civ V? The religious civics are still in - see Piety; religious buildings are still in - temple has been confirmed; Diplomacy modifiers are out but that mechanic was wonky anyway. Have I missed anything?

WHY CAN NO ONE SEE THIS?
Religion is still in the game but it's ridiculous effect on diplomacy has been removed. Religious buildings to represent a civs religions, and Piety to represent particularly religious civs.