The Breath of God: Only the Penitent Man shall pass

[Solver]

This in combination with Vel's thread got me thinking on an article "Why Religious and Scientific is the best trait combination". With my experience, I have played extremely succesfull games with Babylon, especially when I managed to avoid an early golden age by only using Swordsmen as the early warfare unit.

[Flip McWho]

religious hmmmmm. never really played with that civ trait. i just stuck with the persians ever since i met them. but i have to say my next game is gonna be with a civ that has the religious trait. u converted me.

- Philip.

[Solver]

Flip - I also played my first games with the same civ, but then I discovered it's actually much more fun to use Random.

[punkbass2000]

Originally posted by chiefpaco
Culture: As pointed out, scientific buildings produce more culture than the religious buildings but are produced later. I think this may balance them out, especially since I don't have all my cities by the time I usually hit Literature. Then by the time Universities come out, they are the culture monster at 4 per turn (same culture as many wonders) and the same argument can be made on Universities for non-scientific civs than Cathedrals for non-Religious civs.

My counter to this would be:
a) With religious, you start with ceremonial burial, and can build early, cheap temples which will double to four cpt long before you can build universities. In fact, I find that it's difficult to build more than a couple universities before 1050AD, which means they will never double.
b) Universities just aren't useful in small cities. You're losing omney on them, whereas a temple is useful virtuall everywhere.

[Solver]

I got to disagree on Universities here. I think tat by the time you get Education, you'll have a number of cities where you must get those Univerisites. A bit later, you'll also want to get them in smaller cities, for they do both culture and research to you, two vital things.

[chiefpaco]

PB:
a) Good point about culture doubling. That is very important. Too bad the happiness does not double too. Another point on culture doubling though. Libraries double to a 6 culture per turn. Surpassed by only Shakespeare's theatre and 2 greater than the doubled temple. Again, libs come later, but so do some of your cities.

b) Tough tradeoff. In small cities, the University will not help very much. But what will the cathedral do in a small city? I tried to keep the comparison between temples vs. libraries or cathedrals vs. universities. I also assumed temples and libs would be for towns and cathedrals and unis would be for cities.

Now, in a small productive town, I'd give consideration to a library because of my points above. The research that is multiplied can more than cover the cost of raising the luxury slider 10%

In a small unproductive town, I'd lean towards the temple because the lib won't be as effective and the temple could tip off a WLTK, which may grant an extra shield, if that makes much of a difference in your empire.

Of course, building both is great too! Being a Rep or Demo will force a temple or cathedral because there is no Military Police. However, Monarchies can enjoy happiness benefits without cathedrals and colosseums while conquering the world! So I guess my view is tainted by my play style.

[Arrian]

More thoughts on culture (specifically regarding the bonuses of being religious versus scientific):

I'm going to make several assumptions in this post, hopefully without making an ass out of either you or me.

Let us, for example, take a temple in 1250 BC, and compare it to a library built in 500 BC. I use those numbers because, off the top of my head, they seem reasonable.

As I understand it:

4000-2750BC @ 50 yrs/turn (25 turns)
2750-1750BC @ 40yrs/turn (25 turns)
1750-750BC @ 25yrs/turn (40 turns)
750BC-250AD @ 20 yrs/turn (50 turns)
250AD-1250AD @ 10 yrs/turn (100 turns)
1250AD-1750AD @ 5 yrs/turn (100 turns)
1750AD -> irrelevent

Temple built in 1250BC:

1250BC - 250BC = 45 turns = 90 CP
culture output now doubles
250BC - 1000AD = 100 turns = 400 CP

Total culture produced: 490CP

Library built in 500BC:

500BC - 500AD = 63? turns = 189CP
culture now doubles
500AD - 1000AD = 50 turns = 300CP

Total culture produced: 489 CP.

Obviously, from 1010AD forward, the library is ahead. My point is simply, that in this example (assuming my understanding of the years/turn is correct), it takes the library 113 turns to catch up.

My example is arbitrary, I know. It also happens to show, if all other things are equal, that the scientific civ which built it's library in 500BC will catch up and pass the religious civ in the mid-game.

That jives with my observations. Generally, my culture explodes early on when compared to the AI's on the graph. Then, when the AI's get literature, there is a strong upswing in AI culture, reducing my slice of the pie (usually still 1/3 or more of the graph, though). Then, once my cathedrals, universities, and various wonders kick in, my culture expands again. This is usually aided by my tendency to start picking off civs again in the late medieval/early industrial age.

Anyway, I think I would rate the cultural power of religious vs. scientific as a draw. Religious civs have a strong advantage in the early game, whereas Scientific civs make up a lot of ground in the mid-game, and probably take over in the late game. However, I think greater weight has to be given to the early game advantage. So much happens back then that is crucial. If you are a warmonger like me, an early culture edge is insurance against culture flips, and basically ensures a strong cultural advantage throughout the rest of the game. Even as a builder, that early edge can gain you cities via the "culture bomb" before the AI shifts from expansion mode to build/fight mode.

-Arrian

[Lawrence of Arabia]

I don't think that culture is that important during the Ancient Era in SP. The AI is just plopping down cities everywhere, and their culture is limited to what they have in their first and second cities. You may think that if your cities have lots of it, you will be able to assimilate the AI ciites. This is true, but very hard to do. Even if your ciites all have temples, and the ones on the other side of the border don't, it will not be enough to take them over. On top of that, temples cost upkeep per turn. When you are religious, you will want to make temples in every city just because they are cheap. In fact, you dont need temples if you keep your cities under pop 4 and keep REX-ing. It saves you money, and it is useless at the very begiining. Later on, around the end of the expansion phase you should build temples so you can keep people happy. Otherwise, its a wast of money IMLO.

[Cookie Monster]

Allow me to share with you all a thought.

After reading the plethora of information that Vel has divulged upon us, and after reading this thread by Arrian I've come to a conclusion.

Whatever works for your brain the best is what you want to do. We each have specific methodologies and thought processes. Each of our brains are physically and medically alike, however we all have different mathematical and scientific thought processes.

My approach to a problem may be totally different from anothers' approach to the same problem. Yet both of us will solve the problem.

We can dispense advice upon the masses and surely it will be of use. Each individual, however must decide what suits his brain the best.

IMHO both Industrious and religious (not the combo, just the individual) traits are very usefull in the right hands. I for example enjoy civs that have either trait in them, but tend to lean towards religious only because of the 1 turn anarchy. The ability to "shift gears" (I enjoy driving a manual transmission car) rapidly is of utmost importance to me. Fast 0-60 times (to use another car analogy) are not just accomplished with a powerful engine. They are accomplished with a smooth shifter and the drivers clutch to gas pedal coordination. The same, I believe holds true for the ability to shift in and out of govt.s quickly.

I love to engage in massive resource draining prolonged wars. This way I keep my enemies closer to me than my best friend. We are locked in a titanic struggle that keeps him from staying at number one. After 40 turns of war weariness I need to get out of rep/demo without losing valuable military production time. Religious comes in handy here. When the war is over I want to "rake in the cabbage" at blazing speeds so I need to be back in rep/demo at warp speed. Rel is gonna get me there and fast.

So in summary, everyone has hidden strengths and preferences to strats. All we can do is lay down foundations.

The true test will be with the arrival of PTW. I truely look forward to playing legends like Velociryx, Arrian, NYE, Uberkrux, Theseus, et. al. I am not a great player, and I fully expect to lose many many games, but in the process I hope to improve my own single player skills by learning from the best.

I can't wait to meet you all on the virtual battlefield.

[Arrian]

Haupt. Dietrich,

Well said. "To each, their own."

The reason I enjoy discussing things like this is that I often find myself questioning my style of play based on what others post. If I didn't hang out on 'poly, I'd probably still be a builder, playing as Babylon or maybe Egypt all the time. The chariot upgrade strategy I've developed was born of trying to use Egypt as an early warmonger w/o blowing my golden age as an ancient despot (that was smack dab in the middle of my builder to warmonger conversion... before I learned to stop worrying and love the sword ). Throughout, I was having discussions with Theseus (the poster formerly known as rpodos), Sir Ralph, Txurce, and others.

As for MP... well, I've gotta admit I've never played MP before. That goes for any PC game. And I'd hardly consider myself a legend. If I play MP CivIII, I bet I'd get my butt kicked, at least until I changed my mindset to handle it. I dunno... I may not play MP. I certainly don't intend to get PTW until it comes down in price (not because I'm pissed at Firaxis or anything, just because I'm happy with SP).

LoA,

I respectfully disagree about ancient era culture. And culture bombing AI cities early on is easy, if you do it right. This involves building a city or two three tiles away from theirs (city, open tile, open tile, city). With temples in your cities, plus your overall culture advantage, you have a very good chance of getting a flip.

But, like Haupt Dietrich pointed out... to each his own...

-Arrian

[Theseus]

I've never played MP Civ either, so I expect to get humiliated. The only game I ever played MP was C&C, and the first 1-15 games I got my head handed to me. But thanks for the complement.

I do agree with HD's assessment... there are certain things which each "get," and we develop strats that play to our strengths. For instance, I just don;t get the whole JW / Impi thing... I tried a quick Aztec game over the weekend, and just couldn't get anywhere.

Back OT:

Arrian, doesn't your hypothetical temple double again in 750AD? If so, that's another 200 accumulated CP in 1000AD, and a run rate of 8 CP per turn, compared 6 CP for the library. The library would only take the lead from 1500-1750AD.

More to than point than totals, for me at least, is the use of the culture... all about city flips. I either want the protection or I want the advantage when cities territories start to really abut each other, so the early temple is clearly the pick for me.

[Fitz]

LoA, I couldn't disagree more. If you mix your rexing with culture, and pay attention to where you place your cities, you easily absorb the cities of your neighbors. See my comments about having a 20:1 culture ration above. In fact, if you prefer not to REX to much (and thereby ignore the associated corruption problems), you can just settle on the choicest spots and get all your additional cities that you need by absorbing the nearest AI cities. Not only that, but the AI also loves to place cities in spots that are going to be very useful later in the game when resources start appearing, so if you are slapping down settlers two squares away from the AI and absorbing them, you are almost certainly doing yourself a big favor in regards to resources later.

Arrian, I couldn't agree more that the total culture factor is just as important to a warmonger as to a builder. After all, it's nice to be able to leave a minimal garrison and move on, as oppossed to taking one city at a time and using all your troops to try (usually in vain) to keep the city.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

oooooooooooooo
Lotta disagreement here

Arrian: I guess we agree to disagree . Either way, we get ciites, which is essential to a later builder style.

Fitz: I agree with the AI placing cities close to resources, but I never have corruption problems (I usually play Americans or, lately I've been trying Greeks.)

However, in the time it takes to build a temple, you could have built a settler. (usually) And while founding a new city will get you more gold right away, building a temple costs money which will only be paid back later on if a city flips (assuming you dont grow your city past four.) i just prefer to spend shields and foot to get gold now, rather than spend shields and gold, and hope to get gold later on.

To each his own

[Fitz]

I guess I build that city and a temple, or at least that's the way I think about it. Basically my style is settle until you start running into the AI, and then start your temples pronto. Given that I start running into the AI around 8-10 cities, the timing seems perfect.

More precisely, if not forced to do something different I tend to do this:

First city settlers only.
Second city setter, temple, settlers only.
Third city workers only. Around 10 workers I usually throw in the temple.
4th city: Barracks, defenders. Eventually I throw in a temple later (as I catch up on defenders).
5th+ city: temple, settler, barracks, military.

If I have a wonder to work on, it interupts the 5th+ city's work. And obviously I rearrange if a later city turns out to be better at making settlers.

But, here is the key point: You can rush a temple to speed things up. So, you have a choice, that pop can go into a settler and take a lot of time, or you can slap it into a temple right now then start building a settler afterwards, as the pop grow back.

[punkbass2000]

Originally posted by Theseus
Arrian, doesn't your hypothetical temple double again in 750AD? If so, that's another 200 accumulated CP in 1000AD, and a run rate of 8 CP per turn, compared 6 CP for the library. The library would only take the lead from 1500-1750AD.

Improvements only double once. I wish they doubled every thousand years, but that is not the case.