The State Atheism Civic

[Common Sensei]

How about the diplomatic penalty against leaders with religious aspects of their personality (like Isabella, Saladin, Justinian, etc)?

Would it be higher than against a civ who has a different state religion?

I could see a properly modeled State Atheism as a mirror for Free Religion for gameplay, for those situations where you didn't found a religion and you don't have much of a religious presence.

Perhaps there could be some added synergy with Police State, by having Police State provide +1 with Security Bureau and Intelligence Agency. Reduce the +2 for Courthouse and Jail to +1 each.

[snoopy369]

Free Religion is actually much more powerful when you have more religions. The other religious civics are identical for 1 religion, many religions. Free Religion becomes more powerful (more happy faces) as you have more religions...

It's of course worth more than any other religious civic under no religions also, but only because the others have 0 value, and it gives you 10% science boost at least.

[Common Sensei]

Of course, adding State Atheism would produce the odd situation of having access to it upon building Shwedagon Paya.

"Hey guys, we just built this magnificent spiritual center...

...ah, screw it!"

[TimeTraveler]

My thought is to rename the list of religions to "Religions and Philosophies", then add Atheism (and maybe one or two other things?) to the list. Of course, its presence in a city would need some sort of benefit other than the ability to build a certain temple or cathedral or whatnot. I personally suggest something involving wealth and/or research. The "missionaries" might best be called Advocates, much like in Final Frontier.

For a founding tech, I suggest either Education, Printing Press, Liberalism, Scientific Method, or Communism. (Paper is probably too early.)

With seeing how many people here consider State Atheism to disable religious buildings, I can't help but recall: When one is running Theocracy of a certain religion, temples and cathedrals of other religions do not suddenly stop working (or cause unhappiness) and become unbuildable. And if the game is changed so that this did happen, who's to say a civ isn't running a less strict "Organised Religion" or "Pacifism" form of State Atheism?

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Common Sensei
Of course, adding State Atheism would produce the odd situation of having access to it upon building Shwedagon Paya.

"Hey guys, we just built this magnificent spiritual center...

...ah, screw it!"

Hey, those clergy jerks have wasted s***loads of resources building a giant gold thingy instead of feeding the starving masses!


See? It works.

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by TimeTraveler
My thought is to rename the list of religions to "Religions and Philosophies", then add Atheism (and maybe one or two other things?) to the list. Of course, its presence in a city would need some sort of benefit other than the ability to build a certain temple or cathedral or whatnot. I personally suggest something involving wealth and/or research. The "missionaries" might best be called Advocates, much like in Final Frontier.

For a founding tech, I suggest either Education, Printing Press, Liberalism, Scientific Method, or Communism. (Paper is probably too early.)

With seeing how many people here consider State Atheism to disable religious buildings, I can't help but recall: When one is running Theocracy of a certain religion, temples and cathedrals of other religions do not suddenly stop working (or cause unhappiness) and become unbuildable. And if the game is changed so that this did happen, who's to say a civ isn't running a less strict "Organised Religion" or "Pacifism" form of State Atheism?

true, but we've scraped that, I just haven't yet gotten around to editing my first post yet. Look up at what Snoopy is suggesting and my proposed modifications.

Also take a look at Flemes last post.

[TimeTraveler]

Originally posted by Heraclitus


true, but we've scraped that, I just haven't yet gotten around to editing my first post yet.

Which part(s) and where/why? o.O

Originally posted by Heraclitus


Look up at what Snoopy is suggesting and my proposed modifications.

Also take a look at Flemes last post.

I... have? And I'm offended by the idea of State Atheism reducing weariness of war and (especially) conscription. Among the non-deviants in such a place, it's not like there's considered some sort of divinity to guide the virtuous or provide a heaven or next life or whatever for them to go to when they're killed in battle or whatever.

[Fleme]

Indeed now that I think about it, it does seem a bit odd. Here in Finland a large number of atheists refuse conscription based on their beliefs or ethical stance (mutual conscription for all males) and as such it'd be odd to use the civic for drafting.

Just tossing around ideas.

[hart276]

Atheism sort of reminds me of this game i played where somehow saladin somehow adopted theocracy without having any religeon present in one of his cities.

[TimeTraveler]

Originally posted by Fleme
Indeed now that I think about it, it does seem a bit odd. Here in Finland a large number of atheists refuse conscription based on their beliefs or ethical stance (mutual conscription for all males) and as such it'd be odd to use the civic for drafting.

Just tossing around ideas.

Sounds about right... I think.

Originally posted by hart276
Atheism sort of reminds me of this game i played where somehow saladin somehow adopted theocracy without having any religeon present in one of his cities.

I remember that.

[Blake]

The State Atheism bonuses would have to be considered carefully.

Remember, while it's all very well and good to make a bold claim like "Science and religion are incompatible, thus outlawing religion helps science"
That has never been the case in reality.

In practise, it's only a gross excess of religion which can impede science. In other words, using religion to try and explain the world, rather than just using religion to improve wellbeing.

Outlawing religion only leads to many people living more miserable lives.

States which have tried state atheism, have invariably ended up saying "oops, that didn't quite work as we expected". They then usually end up in something like free religion - a secular government, or oppress absolutely everything which can lead to wellbeing (so as to be fair).


I'd make the effects something like this:

* Upon a switch to State Atheism, half of the existing religious buildings are destroyed, converting 50% of their hammer value into gold and generating +1 anger for 10 turns, per building destroyed.
* The remaining religious buildings are retooled, losing all existing effects and generating 1 hammer/turn (until they obsolete).
* Food yield is increased by 15%, due to people leaving the monastic orders and working the land / forced to marry.


Note: A religious building spared from the first purges, would be spared from all future purges. If you switch to SA, then switch out, build some new temples, then switch back into SA, only the NEW temples would be considered for destruction - the buildings which survived an earlier purge would be just spared again.

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Blake

States which have tried state atheism, have invariably ended up saying "oops, that didn't quite work as we expected". They then usually end up in something like free religion - a secular government, or oppress absolutely everything which can lead to wellbeing (so as to be fair).

This can be said of several civics in civ Blake.

[Blake]

But it just doesn't make sense for state atheism to improve science when it never has in real life.

The most scientifically advanced nations are merely secular.

For example, about 98% of the population of Japan is religious.

If you use the logic that religion and science are in any way incompatible, then Japan should be a very backwards nation...



State Atheism is at heart oppressive, it is not liberating. Things which are oppressive and not liberating, do not foster creativity, are not inspiring. Science and culture will not thrive under State Atheism. The bonuses must be otherwise.

[jkp1187]

In a way, the discussion in this thread illustrates the problem of trying to depict every part of reality in a hyper-grand-strategic-level game like Civilization.

There were many intellectual "dead-ends", so to speak, that Humanity pursued over the milennia. Astrology, for instance, or perhaps Cold Fusion. State-enforced atheism is, in my judgment, another example of these dead-ends. Speaking pragmatically, it merely drains resources and antagonizes part of the population without producing much net gain. But there's no point in modeling that accurately, because there's no point in including an obviously bad civics choice in the game -- no one would in their right mind would actually choose it. And, much like the "Dark Ages" that the Civ III developers were initially considering, a random penalty to civs just isn't FUN. (A benefit, though, can be, and so Dark Ages morphed into the Golden Age by the time the game was released.)

Of course, it could always be modeled a different way -- certainly, the State Property civic, is overpowered economically by history's standards, but it is not by in-game standards, so it works, and it is useful in the game as a result. But it works because it fills a specific civic gap (i.e., a civic amenable to pure hammer production and large empires for use in late-game conquest or spaceship production--particularly if the Civ is bypassing or has missed out on Mining or Creative Constructions.)

My question is: what gap would State Atheism fill? Why would I run it in lieu of, say, Free Religion (which gives me science and a little extra happiness,) Organized Religion (which gives me production,) Theocracy (which gives me military experience,) or Pacifism (which gives me more GPP)? And even more especially when I can run all of the above without taking a happiness hit?

Don't get me wrong -- this may be a useful addition to a scenario, especially one in which Civilizations are forced into playing certain civics that will give them certain benefits and disadvantages (like, say the Soviet Bloc in a Cold War scenario, or perhaps even the French in a French Revolution/Napoleonic Wars scenario,) but as an addition to the epic game, I just don't see it.

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Blake
But it just doesn't make sense for state atheism to improve science when it never has in real life.

The most scientifically advanced nations are merely secular.

For example, about 98% of the population of Japan is religious.

If you use the logic that religion and science are in any way incompatible, then Japan should be a very backwards nation...



State Atheism is at heart oppressive, it is not liberating. Things which are oppressive and not liberating, do not foster creativity, are not inspiring. Science and culture will not thrive under State Atheism. The bonuses must be otherwise.

You haven't read my posts have you... If you did you would you would know I never claimed it would. Also I wasn't commenting that. You admonished SA for not working in RL in the long term, I merley pointed out that many civics in civ share that "weakness".