Order of religions

[afrodius]

Is it just me or does the order that religions get founded seem a little screwed up to anyone else? How would Hinduism possibly lead to Judaism? Shouldnt Hinduism lead to Buddhism since Buddhism evolved from Hinduism? Buddhism for some reason leads to the historically far older religion of Taoism. Confucianism, Hinduism, Judaism, and Taoism all usualy arrive after Buddhism in the game, but are far older religions IRL. I understand the need to make more than one religion available in the very early game so one nation cant monopolize all religion, but establishing Buddhism at the dawn of civilization seems a bit ridiculous. Other than having to start out of Hinduism the "western" religions follow a logical progression, but the "eastern" religions are all out of whack.
This is just an idea, but a possible solution to this might be to add an actual ancient religion that still survives to this day such as Zoroastrianism, the first dualistic religion. Though it may be a very minor religion today, it did exert a significant influence on the beliefs of todays western religions (the 3 magi of the Christian faith who followed a star to Bethlehem were most probably Zoroastrian astrologers). Obviously this would require a little fiddling with the tech tree, either adding another religious tech or changing the positions of the existing ones. I know part of this game is the "what if" factor, but having Buddhism arrive so early (its typically the first religion discovered in most of my games) has always bothered me.

[Jerh9e1k5]

Well you could always mod it in if you like

Personally I'm not a history buff, I play the game because I like the strategy, so it doesn't bother me. In fact I hadn't noticed until you brought it up either.

Good point though.

[johnmcd]

Edit them to football teams, then it's cool when the Real Mardrid fans demand the Barca fans change their beliefs. I have

Real Madrid
Barcalona
Celtic
Rangers
Hearts (as below)
Hibs (I'm in Edinburgh so meh)
ManU

[Saurus]

Originally posted by johnmcd
Edit them to football teams, then it's cool when the Real Mardrid fans demand the Barca fans change their beliefs. I have

Real Madrid
Barcalona
Celtic
Rangers
Hearts (as below)
Hibs (I'm in Edinburgh so meh)
ManU

Did you change the "logos" of the religions also to reflect that of the soccer clubs?

[okblacke]

Is it just me or does the order that religions get founded seem a little screwed up to anyone else?

It's not meant to be historically accurate, it's a value judgement: Judaism is better than Hinduism which is better than Buddhism.

I personally wouldn't say Buddhism evolved from Hinduism, though Hinduism preceded, and later absorbed, Buddhism.

And I think the historical order would be: Judaism or Hinduism (depending on how you defined both), Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism (or you could put Taoism before Buddhism or even Judaism, depending on how you defined it), then Christianity and Islam. But Taoism, Hinduism and Judaism have (or claim) ancient roots.

Even where you have nice, clean dates (like for Buddhism, Confucianism, Christianity and Islam), you don't always have the significant dates. (Confucius was not respected in his day; Christianity's ascendance dates to Constantine in 312, etc.)

Just to confuse matters, all religions really come about as the work of a Great Person, yet there's no relation between the GPs and their religions. Give her a chance and Isabella will found all the world's religions which is, to say the least, a bizarre interpretation of "religious fanatic".

How would Hinduism possibly lead to Judaism?

Because in Civ, monotheism represents progress from polytheism. It's a longstanding value judgment the game has always made, and it's completely divorced from the notion of the quintessential monotheistic religion (Judaism) descending from the quintessential polytheistic religion (Hinduism).

Shouldnt Hinduism lead to Buddhism since Buddhism evolved from Hinduism? Buddhism for some reason leads to the historically far older religion of Taoism. Confucianism, Hinduism, Judaism, and Taoism all usualy arrive after Buddhism in the game, but are far older religions IRL.

Just a nitpick: Taoism is debatably older than Buddhism, but Siddhartha and Confucius were contemporaries, and the Daodejing comes later than both.

I understand the need to make more than one religion available in the very early game so one nation cant monopolize all religion, but establishing Buddhism at the dawn of civilization seems a bit ridiculous.

I dunno. Buddhism is, in some ways, the simplest of all religions. They could replace it with Shintoism or something like that, but I think it was really a matter of "We need seven religions. Let's pick the seven biggest ones. Now, where do they fit?"

Other than having to start out of Hinduism the "western" religions follow a logical progression, but the "eastern" religions are all out of whack.

Only for very loose values of "logical". And "religion" come to think of it. I mean, seriously, Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism are not even the same species as Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

This is just an idea, but a possible solution to this might be to add an actual ancient religion that still survives to this day such as Zoroastrianism, the first dualistic religion.

I think the problem with trying to solve this "problem" is that it's only a problem with "historical accuracy". The religion mechanism is just as artificial as the cultural mechanism, and the technological mechanism, and the combat mechanism, etc.

If they really wanted to model religion, it would act as a foil. I don't think that would be too much fun. "The Pope says you can't go to war with your spiritual brethren in France."

but having Buddhism arrive so early (its typically the first religion discovered in most of my games) has always bothered me.

How about Taoism being the result of Philosophy? Is there a religon that isn't the result of Philosophy?

How about the fact that all religions are considered homogenous within themselves, continue unbroken from their founding forward, never to wane in popularity (short of actual destruction of cities where they exist) and heterogeny has only positive effects?

I think if I were to pick a "problem" with the model, it would be the last. The idea that I can only benefit from religious diversity. I'm not sure the "solution" to that would be very fun, though.

[Jerh9e1k5]

I like the football teams idea

Maybe I'll implement a similar hockey one... :P

[gentle]

lol, thats a good laugh. must think of Ghandi saying:
"Adopt the hedgehog or else I will crush you with c4 !"

[Solomwi]

If they really wanted to model religion, it would act as a foil. I don't think that would be too much fun. "The Pope says you can't go to war with your spiritual brethren in France."

Ugh, shades of one of the worst aspects of Civ 2: "The Senate has vetoed your war motion!" (or however it was worded.)

[axi]

I think that someone made a mod where religions are replaced with fast food chains.

The football clubs idea is much more fun though.

Replace temple with "fan club"
Replace monastery with "football academy"
Replace missionary with "transfer player" (use icon of footballer with ball in hand)
Replace cathedral with with "merchandise store"
Replace holy monument with the team's stadium name (Bernabeu, Camp Nou, Old Trafford, etc...)

This way you can train players to transfer to other cities if you have a football academy and have a suitable bonus on research and you can build a merchandise store if you have enough fanclubs. And of course you can build only one Bernabeu, Camp Nou, etc... Perfect.

You could change civic's names too. Theoracy could be "Hooliganism", Pacifism would be "Sportsmanship", Org. Religion could be "Professional League".

[Hastlek]

Actually, a better parallel to religions might be sport types instead. So, you might have "religions" of Baseball, Football, Rugby, Hockey, etc. Your temples could be "minor league team", monasteries "little leagues", missionaries "fans", cathedrals "major league team", and monuments "hall of fame".

Convert to Baseball, you heathens!

[okblacke]

Originally posted by Solomwi


Ugh, shades of one of the worst aspects of Civ 2: "The Senate has vetoed your war motion!" (or however it was worded.)

Yeah, what a PITA no-fun thing that was.

Realism is the enemy here. The thing about the religions in Civ is that they work and are fun--the whole sports/fast-food/whatever mods discussed here really illustrate the point. I hope Civ 5 builds on them the way Civ 4 built on culture.

Some of the most absurd things in Civ are the most fun. How many people enjoy the "culture bomb" of expanding their borders instantaneously by having an artist create a great work? So much fun that people do it even when it's not a smart game move, and it's positively ridiculous.

[snafuc4]

Originally posted by okblacke

"The Pope says you can't go to war with your spiritual brethren in France."

I had a long love/hate relationship with that concept in MTW. While I can see its necessity (in that game at least), I hated its implementation when I wanted to (re)gain some important territories..

[snafuc4]

Originally posted by axi
You could change civic's names too. Theoracy could be "Hooliganism", Pacifism would be "Sportsmanship", Org. Religion could be "Professional League".

LOL! Luvvit!

[axi]

Actually, a better parallel to religions might be sport types instead. So, you might have "religions" of Baseball, Football, Rugby, Hockey, etc. Your temples could be "minor league team", monasteries "little leagues", missionaries "fans", cathedrals "major league team", and monuments "hall of fame".

Convert to Baseball, you heathens!

Yes, but it is no fun!

[joncnunn]

The Civ series has never let realism get in the way of fun.