SubDeity posted...
Oh look it's literally just readding stuff from Civ 4.
I'll wait for Complete.
Completely different systems with the same name. "Readding stuff from Civ 4". Sensibility abounds in this post.
Take for instance "religion". Religion in Civ 4 was just awful. I was pretty much "yeah, my gut says that's a good move for religion not being in Civ 5." In Civ 4 religion had so many stupid balance problems, a lot of them fundamental. Every religion was a carbon copy of each other (except for a small difference, which I'll address later), so much to the point that they let you choose which religion you wanted to found when you did if you wanted in one of the patches or expansions. As such, there was basically zero reason to follow any religion other than Buddhism/Hinduism and a bit less commonly Judaism unless you wanted to piss off everyone else (in which case, the other religions were all pretty much functionally identical).
The ONLY way the religions differed was that they spread naturally at different rates. The idea being, of course, that later religions would need a leg up to be viably spread versus those already entrenched. Of course, that didn't really matter because most spreading was intentional and in games where it mattered the first two or three religions basically became so entrenched because people would IMMEDIATELY flip their state religion to that because there was no cost for doing so.
Well, at least it was a good diplomatic tool when it did mattered? Except for the fact it was stupidly asymmetrical. The actual GAMEPLAY drawbacks were almost non-existant. A... minor disadvantage to attacking people with a state religion your people followed? It spreads a bit faster naturally if it's your state religion? Like, why is Isabella so pissed I don't follow her state religion? I'm not actively helping her spread it? Why is she indifferent if I have NO state religion then? Why doesn't she try to take the holy city? There's actual big gameplay incentives for that. Like, the Apostolic Palace was the ONLY reason I ever switched half way through for a non-diplo gameplay reason.
In short, religion basically became "oh look at what I can do to the stupid AI". It was just poor design.
The expansion's system looks like it just plain solves this BS, so that's good. Is religion still stong if you go for it out of the gate? Looks like it. Not only that, it's because there's actual GAMEPLAY reasons for that (get bonuses faster, get more choice in the bonuses you take). Can you still carve out a niche religion later, or even a MORE popular one? Looks like it, there seems to be a wide variety in choices you can make so that each religion is actually different (so the war-mongerers that get a religion later might want the more offensive options but the people that rushed religion went for builder style choices).
--
assert(!hotterThan(foo, "Hot Nymphomaniacal Lesbian Mind-Controlling Dominatrix Fairy Doctors with glasses"))