Is Religious the Best Civ Trait ?

SorvinoBackhand · July 27, 2003, 13:45

The more I play, the more religious feels like the almost indispensable civ trait. The cheap temples and cathedrals are nice for preventing culture flipping on your periphery. But can anything beat the flexibility of easy government switching ? I find that significantly expands my options; particularly warfare is so much easier, fun and rewarding.

What do you think ?

Rhothaerill · July 27, 2003, 13:50

Religious is the second best trait behind industrious IMHO. There are threads in the strategy archives about that and I tend to agree with them (despite the fact they're old). Truthfully though I find all the traits useful in some way or another (even expanionist can be useful though it's my least favorite).

I used to think religious was at least as good as industrious, but I had a "religious crutch" at the time and would only play religious civs for the same reasons you stated above. But I deliberately stopped using religious all the time and I think I've become a better player for not always using it. Not using it expanded my options to think in different ways.

SorvinoBackhand · July 27, 2003, 14:04

I think I may be in a similar bind. For awhile all I played was Aztec, Japan and other religious civs. I have been trying others more recently; that's what prmopted the poll. I have been trying to fight wars in Republic and keep them brief. But at Emporer (at which I am competitive) it is SO hard not being able to switch flexibly. I find routinely at Emporer that the AI attacks me early and/or without warning. Building in peace for awhile seemed to work at Monarch, but at Emporer the wars seem pretty regular. Hence religious becomes a crutch...
What do you suggest ?

Spiffor · July 27, 2003, 14:49

I find religious to be very nice, and I often play with religious Civs. However, I think of religious as an excellent support to toher traits (such as industrious or militaristic) rather than as an excellent trait by itself. If I had to choose the best trait, I'd go for industrious : the quick development at the beginning of the game can save you many headaches later, including situations that would require a revolution.

Industrious Religious rocks

Wittlich · July 27, 2003, 15:00

I like the religious trait - I can change government just like I change my underwear!

I also like the expansionistic trait for early game play - better things from goody huts...though I also like the industrious trait. To bad I can't play with 3 traits instead of just 2.

I know, I know...GREED - I want more of EVERYTHING!

Jonny · July 27, 2003, 15:29

I believe religious is the best trait.

With 1 turn anarchy and cheap religious buildings, it is very helpful for any strategy, peaceful or military.

Religious =

asleepathewheel · July 27, 2003, 16:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Wittlich

I like the religious trait - I can change government just like I change my underwear!

Ah, see, using the same standard, non-religious civs work for me

I like religious civs, but I tend to use that trait as a crutch. Maybe I should try a game as a civ with no traits, and see how that works out.

I tend to play as Egypt or Iroquios, love the religious. but I love the industrial and expansionist traits. The only trait that I usually avoid is the scientific. Just doesn't do anything for me.

Nor Me · July 27, 2003, 16:51

No, Industrious is better. I now think the other 5 traits are even.

You only need to switch once although more is nice and you only save 30 shields for many cities.

Early on, units are a better investment than temples usually. By the time you need them, you have other options to balance.

As for indispensability, any trait feels like that if you use it often enough. You know I sometimes hate having only a couple of warriors to explore which have to be built and getting barbarians instead of settlers from huts.

Sheik · July 27, 2003, 16:55

Industrious is the best. Combine that with Religious and you have a very nice combo IMO.

Wittlich · July 27, 2003, 16:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Nor Me
You know I sometimes hate having only a couple of warriors to explore which have to be built and getting barbarians instead of settlers from huts.

Ah, but that's the beauty of an expansionistic civ - a free scout to start off with - and I have as of yet to uncover a barbarian from any goody huts that I find (playing as the Iroquois).

Last Conformist · July 27, 2003, 17:08

Expansionistics can't pop barbs from goody huts.

I think Religious is roughly equal to Commercial and Scientific, while superior to Militaristic and inferior to Industrious. Expansionistic really can't be included in the ranking, since it's far more dependent on map conditions than any of the other traits. On huge pangaeas, it's arguably the strongest trait, whereas it can be pretty much nullified if you happen to start on a very small continent.

Wittlich · July 27, 2003, 17:12

I agree LC...and even though I like the expansionistic trait, it's only good at the beginning of the game. In later game play, the expansionistic trait is basically wasted.

Spiffor · July 27, 2003, 17:23

Expansionist Religious can be a very potent combo. You acquire the best land very quickly (exploration advantage + culture advantage). WHen you are done with peaceful settlement, you can either conquer with Iroqu's mounted warriors, or with Arab Ansar Warriors. In both cases, they further extend your territory, for you to have a huge, fertile land by mid game.
The game is pretty much settled at this point

vmxa1 · July 27, 2003, 17:36

Ok, I don't have any problem with religous, but I do not use it.
I do not need cheap temples or cath. I like them, but I do not need them.
No need to switch gov, so now what is left for this trait?
I do one switch to Republic ASAP and leave it at that. I am on an Emperor game now and have been at war for so long, I have lost track. It is no sweat as long as they start the wars, you keep winning it and have luxs.
At best the temples will be 15 or more turns on those newly conquered cities and if it takes that long, I don't care if it takes a lot longer.

Commercial or Mil is more useful to me (after Ind of course).

Jon Shafer · July 27, 2003, 18:05

Industrious is indispensible. Religious is not. At least, for me anyways.

Panag · July 27, 2003, 19:07

hi ,

no

industrious or expan

have a nice day

notyoueither · July 27, 2003, 19:25

If you get that free settler within 10 or 20 turns (I get that more than half the time I have played Exp) then it cannot be a bad trait. Adding double or 50% to your REX rate is of incalculable value.

Even if you find yourself on an island or small continent, you have one of the thechs required to get off it.

Expantionist is second to industrious only, in my book.

Note, I used to play at Emperor exclusively as Romans, so anything that helps growth is a boon to me.

alva · July 27, 2003, 22:27

Religious is good on higher levels (easier to maintain happiness).

My preferable combo is Ind-Sci (cheap culture + good science and a good/fast/cheap way to expand borders in new cities while at war)

Panag · July 27, 2003, 22:53

Quote:

Originally posted by alva
Religious is good on higher levels (easier to maintain happiness).

My preferable combo is Ind-Sci (cheap culture + good science and a good/fast/cheap way to expand borders in new cities while at war)

hi ,

if you can expand and build faster you get the same effect , .....

(industr & expan)

have a nice day

vmxa1 · July 27, 2003, 23:27

A free settler from a hut is not dependent upon the exp trait. I sometimes will hold off on making my first settler a bit to make warriors and then get a settler fom a hut. This is due to being behind the avg civs size, not anything to do with exp. Just do not have a settler in the queue.
Exp is a trait I just do not see much value in, even in a larger map. So no barbs, so what? Less techs maybe, does not matter as I will soon be behind either way.
Scout to get to them first? Really, then how come I will see huts near the AI and it just ignores them.
Now if you are talking MP, that is different.
So to me its
Ind
Commercial/Mil
who cares.

Arrian · July 28, 2003, 08:32

I once argued (pretty well, I thought

) that Religious was the top trait.

It was in response to the general concensus that Industrious was tops, and Vel's thread about it (the Virtues of Being Industrious, if memory serves).

Now, after many hundreds (thousands?

) more hours of play, I concede the debate. Industrious is #1.

Religious is still really solid, though. It comes in at #2 for me (just in front of militaristic).

Expansionist, while it can be useful (even extremely powerful), can also be a dud. It is, as I'm sure NYE will agree, a gambler's trait. As such, I do like playing with it from time to time.

-Arrian

Tiberius · July 28, 2003, 08:44

Quote:

Is Religious the Best Civ Trait ?

No, industrious is.

Religious is a very good trait though. But then good traits are scientific, commercial, militaristic, or exp in MP, etc.

I'm curious whether the new traits (seafaring, agricultural) will change or not the old ones.

Panag · July 28, 2003, 09:02

hi ,

allas , should we have a poll , .....

have a nice day

Dominae · July 28, 2003, 11:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
I once argued (pretty well, I thought

) that Religious was the top trait.

I argued against Arrian (pretty convincingly, I thought

).

The problem with Religious, I think, is that there are other options for keeping your populace content than Temples and Cathedrals. Effective use of the Lux slider and the potency of Luxury resources (especially when warmongering) means that you can often do without the happiness those improvements provide. Because Temples and Cathedrals are not really "must-builds" for the happiness effect, Religious suffers. Therefore, cheap Temples only become really useful defensively, in terms of Culture war. This is a nice ability, but nothing compared to some other traits.

As alva pointed out, Religious is great on Deity, where it's tougher to go out and grab those Luxs by force, and tougher to grab enough land without expanding borders. On Emperor and below, it is very possible to make do without Religious, because you can both out-expand and out-fight the AI.

Dominae

TheArsenal · July 28, 2003, 12:11

I find industrious to be the best trait for me.

But I've been playing a bit of Arabia of late (tearing myself away from China). Expansionist/Religious is a pretty good trait combo. Building three scouts on the larger maps can pop quite a few techs and at least one settler. It's not hard to jump out to a quick tech lead and a quickly lead in the number of (well placed, due to scouts) cities.

Religious, beyond the obvious benefits of war-time government flips, allows me to move out of an unproductive government without losing turns in wonder race.

vmxa1 · July 28, 2003, 12:35

I hate to disagree with Arrian, but I am with Dom on this one. Only Deity (maybe OCC) would I elevate Rel to number 2.
I do not see any flips in most of my games. It is very rare. I just captured two major cities, each with two wonders and they did not flip the cities I had captured next to them, nor have they flipped. One was also the capitol.
I really do not see any need to switch government after getting out of Despot.
Cheap temples are not needed in late game captured cities as they are not very productive, so they can sit for as many turns as needed or you can rush the temple. As a commercial civ, I have lots of cash. I won't even build cath in those out lying cities.
Now if you are on an island in a map with lots of water, that may be the time to think about Rel.
This is because you will have a hard time getting 5 or 6 lux to pacify the people.
Again I had read all the talk about switching govs and I just do not see the need. Yes if you were Rel, you would do it to some advantage, but really you are talking about a game that is already in hand.

vmxa1 · July 28, 2003, 12:42

I should mention that one of the reason they do not flip is that I tend to have 3-5 armies sit on them (with many other units), until resisters are gone. I will then take down the next city. These are size 6-12, when they are taken the culture boarders often will drop way back. I will have all pop on specialist, until resisters are done.
This is the stage of the game where all land is claimed and I want to prevent any intrusion into the battle area.
IOW I do not want to slash and burn as the open land would soon be full of interlopers. I want that land. Not because I need it, but toallow access to the next target.

Theseus · July 28, 2003, 13:43

Boy, we haven't had one of these in a while!!

The longer I've played and watched others report / discuss here, and as we've gone through much, much more thoughtful discussions about various topics (i.e., from the early days of civ traits and UUs through development of AU and the AU Mod through city placement, etc.)...

The more firmly I am convinced that IND is the mack-daddy, baddest mofo on the block trait in the game.

Why? Production power. Given just about any in-game situation, and show me the player who can produce the maximum shields and golds from a given set of tiles, and I'll show you a winner. And that is most easily supported by IND.

Cheap buildings? I just make more gold with IND.

Corruption? IND makes more gold, rush corruption buildings.

Free techs from EXP or SCI? Feh... a kick-ass IND production empire can outresearch anyone.

Actually, the only civ trait characteristic that IND doesn't help with is MIL promotions.

TheArsenal · July 28, 2003, 15:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Theseus
Boy, we haven't had one of these in a while!!

The longer I've played and watched others report / discuss here, and as we've gone through much, much more thoughtful discussions about various topics (i.e., from the early days of civ traits and UUs through development of AU and the AU Mod through city placement, etc.)...

The more firmly I am convinced that IND is the mack-daddy, baddest mofo on the block trait in the game.

From what I've read at this (and other) forums, and from my games, most people are. The debate should really be refined to the question: "Which Civ trait compliments Industrious the best?"

Dominae · July 28, 2003, 15:33

Quote:

The debate should really be refined to the question: "Which Civ trait compliments Industrious the best?"

Or, better: "Other than Industrious, which is the best trait?" I think you'll find that if you look at the list of Industrious civs, they're all good (the weakest being, ah, the French!?). So a better question is which civs are good despite not being Industrious.

Dominae