Worldreligions or Generic-only-Religions

[warpstorm]

But why extract "religion" out of "culture"?

Because many cultures can share the same religion.

 

[dh_epic]

Yeah, I'm having trouble with the same question, Bartleby. While religion is obviously a factor in history, I think explaining wars and borders and hostility through cultural difference is nearly as effective. It would be the difference between giving your Spearman a few hitpoints, or giving it a quantifiable number like "1000 spearmen" -- sure the latter is more precise and accurate, but the concept basically comes across in Civ 3.

I do like Trade Peror's example, however. Since religion isn't always a homogenous mass, and since America's christianity can be seen different from Italy's christianity, a few traits may actually be the best way to illustrate it. This would be a more effective way to model the surprising agreements between different religions, and the common disagreements between people of the same religion.

Plus a bunch of trait building-blocks would be effective to illustrate early religions (where the Emperor often had a divine relationship to God, or was in fact a God), the religions that would spread in the middle ages, and the saturation and nuances that make up religion in our current postmodern age. Much more flexible to reflect history, and sidesteps many disagreements.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

If only abstract religions are implemented, could there be religious units? religious buildings? could there be any religious themes like in music or art, as in Medieval: Total War?

Abstract religions leave you pretty tied to the concept religion... It will be harder to implement things that come from religions as a consekvens but involve other parts of the civilizations.

 

[dh_epic]

There already have been religious units and religious buildings in past versions of Civ. Personally, I'd rather see more culture-unique units than a new class of religion-unique units. You could probably accomplish a lot with just culture-group unique units. (e.g.: the western europeans get this, the mediterraneans get those, the near east gets another set, and the far east another, and so forth)

 

[EddyG17]

@EddyG17, this is not a good idea, because most (to all) the churches and cathedrales and Domes, etc in the world are built on top of older places of worships. When Rome converted to Christianity, many many religions were spread throughout its empire. One of the biggest was the Mitrhaism. It had many many 'temples' in for example europe. Nowadays, they are ALL (practically) churches. Therefore I dislike your idea, it's not very realistic...

mfG mitsho

You are right... i guess... you could have an option to select what religion would be hosted in the building (making a citizens of the ex religion angry to the possible extend of civil dissorder, this would be a more aggresive way to change the official religion of your empire.)

 

[phorvath2110]

I have an idea on how to implement religion into the game. It actually is very similar to what other have mentioned.

Every civ has its own generic religion. Let's say the Germans have "Germano-Religion". Then Germany can modify or evolve its religion through the tech tree, so that Germano-Religion can start off as animist and then progress to polytheist, monotheist or agnostic as discoveries become available.

Therefore you can change your society through social engineering. The americans can be a monotheist democracy for example. Another nation may be a monotheist theocracy, or a polytheist theocracy, etc...

This would end up creating a system where you can have a highly devout nation that allows civil freedoms, France for example. Or you can have a highly devout nation with less civil freedoms, Taliban Afghanistan for example. Or a nation which is less religious with little freedom old USSR. etc...

What do you guys think?

 

[sir_schwick]

Religion would be like culture, where you start converting neighbors, or vice-versa. Once the world is 80% settled and your religion is the religion of 90% of the population, you win a religious victory. Then, a few turns later, an Army of Heaven arrives to convert the heathens if you have any of the religions based on Judaism(Islam and Christianity). Any religions that are relatives of Hinduism(I know there are literally thousands of forms) could have the armies of the various dieties reign destruction on the unbeliever. Buddha himself would come and woop ass on those who do not have good karma. The Polytheists who are not already covered recieve their dieties. The Nature religions summon the power of the EArth, Water, and Sky. The Alien worshipers would see the coming of the aliens. The atheists would become super-psychic warriors, capable of destroying a city with a thought.

Of course some of you would say this completely detracts from the serious and historical nature of civ, but never has 90% of the world population followed the same religion when 80% of the world was settled. Maybe this coudl be a toggled option rather than mandatory.

 

[citizen001]

i think religion would be a flawed concept as not every single person in a country believes in 1 religion and there will always be people who believe in other religions.

 

[Bartleby]

i think religion would be a flawed concept as not every single person in a country believes in 1 religion and there will always be people who believe in other religions.

I agree with you. This is why I like the blanket concept of "culture" so much more and I think it's a real mistake to separate religion. It's just another reason to go to war and IMO there's enough war in civ already.

 

[MeatWad]

I agree that not everyone in a single country believes in a single religion, but from a gaming POV it's understandable to have some kind of 'state-sponsored' religion. Not everone has to subscribe to it, but it's there and as such helps define a Civ's culture. But it's also an abstract represented by the players own beliefs and should come through in an individual's strategy/gameplay. I'm not sure I like the idea of being saddled with religion, something for all the atheists out there. Maybe it's effects in the game could be limited or removed in the MA, say after the invention of 'Television'

 

[Loppan Torkel]

i think religion would be a flawed concept as not every single person in a country believes in 1 religion and there will always be people who believe in other religions.

Well there could be a percentage in every city - 75% christians, 20% muslims, 5 % jews. Other civs could try to convert your civ's cities and hope for rebellions or cooperate for a combined religious victory or something.

 

[sir_schwick]

History is about war and full of it. People don't need a reason, they are just glad to have one.

i think religion would be a flawed concept as not every single person in a country believes in 1 religion and there will always be people who believe in other religions.

That has been my compliant with culture is that everyone in a civilization is not of the same ethnic and cultural background, even living in the same city. Scotland does not have 'English' culture, although it may share a lot, the same way England shares Scottish culture. THey all ultimately consider themselves Brittish. Individual and powerful cities should have thier own unique-culture.

 

[dh_epic]

I just fail to see the benefits of adding religion to the game, more often than thinking it's a good idea. The only benefit that people have cited is greater realism and historical accuracy.

But you could pretty much simulate the most important religiously-involved events in history with just culture and culture-groups, in my opinion. I challenge someone to give me a counter example -- and secretly hope they can convince me otherwise.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

If you add worldreligions you could implement an option to make the game more mission-driven. You could race to be the most influential cathologic civ and be assigned Pope/Papal power(?), which would give you certain power over the cathologic civs during the medieval era, and give directives for crusades and meddle in other civs affairs...
There are a lot of things that could be implemented that would spice things up with worldreligions. Civ could get a lot more complex and people would still feel familiar since they recognize the things in the game.

I want religion in but I agree that culture and religion goes into eachother and maybe culture should be revised, but in the end I think they're best seperated.

 

[sir_schwick]

If you add worldreligions you could implement an option to make the game more mission-driven. You could race to be the most influential cathologic civ and be assigned Pope/Papal power(?), which would give you certain power over the cathologic civs during the medieval era, and give directives for crusades and meddle in other civs affairs...
There are a lot of things that could be implemented that would spice things up with worldreligions. Civ could get a lot more complex and people would still feel familiar since they recognize the things in the game.

I want religion in but I agree that culture and religion goes into eachother and maybe culture should be revised, but in the end I think they're best seperated.

I know we all hate the Pope in MTW. Also, the Papacy during the Medieval era was one of the first large-scale Multi-lateral international(lots of adjectives) organizations in history. It did some of the same functions the UN accomplishes now. Religion would also be a good way to create multi-lateral federations(i know there were others, but they were very localized, such as the Peloponessian League and such).

 

[Yuri2356]

Religion would be like culture, where you start converting neighbors, or vice-versa. Once the world is 80% settled and your religion is the religion of 90% of the population, you win a religious victory. Then, a few turns later, an Army of Heaven arrives to convert the heathens if you have any of the religions based on Judaism(Islam and Christianity). Any religions that are relatives of Hinduism(I know there are literally thousands of forms) could have the armies of the various dieties reign destruction on the unbeliever. Buddha himself would come and woop ass on those who do not have good karma. The Polytheists who are not already covered recieve their dieties. The Nature religions summon the power of the EArth, Water, and Sky. The Alien worshipers would see the coming of the aliens. The atheists would become super-psychic warriors, capable of destroying a city with a thought.

Of course some of you would say this completely detracts from the serious and historical nature of civ, but never has 90% of the world population followed the same religion when 80% of the world was settled. Maybe this coudl be a toggled option rather than mandatory.

Psychic athiests? Why not just have them build GDRs???

This Sunday, it's THE BATTLE OF THE CENTURY At the London Colloseum, as two supernatural Titans DUKE IT OUT to become the etheral champion.
It's:
JESUS VS BUDDAH

In the Blue Corner: weighing in at 179lbs, The Miracle Man, Son Of the Christain God, Jeeeeeeesus Chist!
Fans: We love you Jesus!
Bless you all.

And in the Red Corner: Weighing in at god-only-knows-what, The re-incarnator, and champion of the Eastern Religieons, Buuuudah.
*cheering*
Chinees guy: You da man Buddah! Kill him! Kill him!

Alright gentlemen, shake hands. Let's have a nice clean fight. No Karma, Miracles, or hits below the belt.

And Now,
LET'S GET READY TO RUMBLE!!!!!!!


*ding*

 

[sir_schwick]

How could I forget GDRs? :smacks myself:

I also forgot about Satan worshippers. Then we could show the fight from South Park between Satan and Jesus.

@dh_epic
The best reason to include religion in civ is so they can implement the 'religious victory'. It is hard to have a diety come down and 'rehabilitate' the unbelivers if you have no religion. Even athiests get GDRs.

 

[Yuri2356]

Perhaps we should allow reserch of "necromancy"

Necromancy: Allows building of Zombie (5/5/1 Costs 20 shields. -1HP.) and Graveyard (Improvement: Allows creation of veteran zombies, all zombie units spending turn in city are healed) And of course, Necropolis (wonder: Free graveyard in all cities on the continent)

 

[Alafin]

I had this posted under the Future Era ideas thread, but I think my ideas on the subject of religion in this game fit better here. Apologies to anyone who has already read this:

Basically the whole idea of there being a win position where one branch of humanity "wins" is ludicrous and totally ahistorical. If history teaches us nothing it is that there is no win position that doesn't fundamentally include all of the peoples and nations of the earth in the win. The sending of a spaceship to colonize a planet orbiting Alpha Centauri is a totally arbitrary goal, yet a goal of some kind is necessary to give the game focus. I feel pity for people who try to "win" civ through military conquest. To me, that kind of "win" is in reality a loss. Rather, a goal that would truly be worth achieving should be one that firmly establishes world peace, so that, in the shade of the tree of collective security, the energy that currently goes into the development of new and more efficient ways of slaughtering each other can be directed into research that will truly improve the quality of our lives. This will be the true peace dividend.

Yes, some will argue that mankind has always been warlike, and therefore always will be. What this argument fails to take into account is that mankind has two natures, an animal nature that prompts us to act in selfish ways, for mere survival as well as for self-advancement (both of the individual and "tribal/family" type), and a higher nature whether conceived of as merely rational (a mental acuity unavailable to even our closest animal kindred) or as a divine-endowment (some kind of soul or spirit unique to us) as most religious belief-systems suggest. It is my argument that this higher nature enables us to rise above our animal nature to achieve goals no animal could even conceive of, one of which is the annihilation of all life on the planet (save the lowly cockroach), but another of which is the permanent establishment of international peace in the world under which the true spiritual potential of mankind could at long last flourish.

Now, I ask you, which of you in the heart of your heart does not believe that the achievement of world peace is not a worthier goal of civilization than the establishment of a colony on another planet?

Humbly yours,
Alafin Bahahotep

 

[Alafin]

And this:

Perhaps instead of an end-game that focuses on building a spaceship the focus could be on building the shared buildings of a world government/world religion. The "winner" would be the civ that contributes the greatest number of building components to the finished structure(s). In ToT Fantasy scenario, the ultimate goal is to build a Great Siege Engine for instance, so I know it's possible to do this. Since religion is going to play a bigger role in cIV, an end-game world religion to which all peoples of the world "convert" would avoid the odiousness of a victory coming through one of the historical religions (ie: All the world becoming Muslim, Christian or Buddhist). This is not meant to be a put-down of any religion; I just think it's unrealistic to expect world peace to come about under the umbrella of any of the historical religions of the world. Christ said not to put new wine in old wine skins and any new religion would be like new wine to the human soul, necessitating a new wine skin or outward form for the religion.

Alafin Bahahotep