Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Religions - Towards a better, non-politically correct Civ

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    That "paganism" definition from the game manual isn't really accurate. Paganism just means a traditional religious practice in contrast with Christianity. Pagani were country people who practiced the old hellenic, germanic, norse, or celtic religions during the Christianization of europe. The manual definition really contrasts pantheism/animism with polytheism.




    I agree that "Hinduism" is really just a surviving into the modern era of a religion that isn't all that different from the pre-christian and pre-islamic religions of Europe and the Middle East. And if Egypt had never been Christianized and then Islamicized, they would have today an "Egyptianism" religion. After all, "Hinduism" just means "religion of India".

    Hinduism really is the odd man out in the Civ religions. To really model the survival of Hinduism you'd have to give each civilization a traditional pagan religious system. Egypt, Rome, Greece, Vikings, Japan, India, Germans, etc, all have their traditional polytheistic religions, which can be replaced by universalist religions like Christianity or Islam or overlain by philosophies like Buddhism or Confucianism.

    So Japan's traditional religion would be Shinto, overlain by the addition of Buddhism. China's traditional religion would be Taoism, overlain by Buddhism and Confucianism. Greece's traditional religion would be Hellenism, replaced by Christianity. The Aztec traditional religion would be Mexica, and after their civ was wiped off the map by the Spanish, the Spanish replace it by Christianity. India's traditional religion would be Hinduism, replaced by...nothing. Sure, a few cities converted to Islam, but most cities with nothing.

    Hinduism, Taoism and Shinto (a modern polytheist religion not modeled in Civ IV) don't really belong with the set of discovered religions like Buddhism, Chrisitanity, Confucianism, and Islam. They're only included because they survived to the present day. I suppose Judaism is another odd one, because it isn't a universalist religion, nor a polytheistic traditional religion.
    Think Galactically -- Act Terrestrially

    Comment


    • #32
      Inquistor.. a non-combat unit like a missionary that removes instead of adds religions. How about that? Easier than trying to think up a balanced combat unit!

      Also, unless you have free religion or no specified state religion, more than 1 religion in a city causes unrest.

      Now somebody just needs to make it so we can go on holy wars

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Ijuin


        I would agree with that. How about under Theocracy, every non-state religion results in a -1 happiness penalty? There have been complaints that Theocracy is more powerful than Vassalage anyway (since it comes earlier and has lower maintenance), and this would balance it out more.
        Theocracy is not more powerful than Vassalage.
        Vassalage is +2 exp in EVERY city, not just state religion ones.
        You get paid to run Vassalage, provided you have unit upkeep. The free units minus civic upkeep is only a few extra gold, except for organized leaders, they profit a lot from vassalage. But anyway, it always costs less than Theocracy unless you have no unit upkeep (and at Monarch+ difficulties that wont happen if you want a viable army).

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Yuufo
          For example, Judaïsm only concerns selected people.

          Actually I prefer to think of it in terms of CIV abstracting the concept of diaspora.

          Comment

          Working...
          X