yeah - but what if I like the specific religion model of Buddism for example. I have no desire to change it though. I would actually like to be able to explore what I could do as a Buddist Nation which is ground in real world history, and see maybe if I could do better - or do something different with it. I like the challange of taking something which is real in the world and using my it and my own abilities to see what possibilites are avaiable, and how I could do things differnt. For example - I wanna see if I can take Christianty - in its stragiht jacket form with specific relgions model and see if I could have won the Crusades and dominated the world. That 's part of the fun, knowing that you are as close as possible to what decisions Ceaser might have made or other great leaders and other civs - and to see if you could do better or do something different. I like the constraints of Specific relgions - it's part of the challange. If you go the Generic way -then I lose that sense of challange. Why do romans have legions and not some Generic milatry unit - because it was the roman legions which were part of their might. Same reason, why have a Generic religon that I must use in the game, when I can actually have the closest things to it. I want the constraints of Specific Relgion. That's were the challange lies for me. To use real world example as close as possible and to see in what combination I can use them to do better then all the great leaders of our History. If I sat down infront of Alexander the Great and told him how I had to face a Generic Relgion in my conflict -he would laugh at me and he would say that he actually faced the real thing - there's no way you can compare yourself to me he would tell me . . . of course we can never get as close to reality as it really was, but we can at least do our best. I don't know, that's just me I guess . . .