The Religion Question: A Case for Trade

[HistoryProf]

I am hoping to see EBII as the greatest gameplay experience in the history of turn-based strategy games.

A great oppurtunity is before the EBII development team: a group that, even though I have never had the pleasure of meeting, elicits a respect I am often reticent to deliver. Cheers to you all!

New characters, abilities, dynamics and game-play characteristics are going to be made available when EBII gets adapted to M2:TW (A game whose current mods I have played extensively).

Chief among them, is the role of the Papacy, of priests/cardinals and of religion.

I have heard, vis-a-vis Mssr. Marcus, that "Culture" is to take the place of Religion. That is a worthy idea. Middle-Age religion had a definitiveness that was lacking in the ancient world. Makes it easy to portray. Not so in the ancient world, I agree.

So, culture has been either floated as an idea, or a commitment has been made. I have no clue how that would be implemented (I am no modder), but considering 'Kingdoms' alllows for percentages of religious adherence to be known in a region, perhaps a nation like Bactria could be described as having some level of Hellenistic or other culture, and therefore some advantage could be gained by steering the popular culture in a particular direction.

If that is the basic idea behind the adaptation of religion to culture, then:

Let's consider the case for "Trade":

I'd like to have a discussion about the merits of Trade, be it for the sake of realism or game-play.

The first reason I will present for the adaption to trade instead of culture is that trade has immediate effects. If it is cut off, it can be extremely political. It works on a day-to-day basis, and has a year-to-year scale as well. Take away a cities access to grain, and you have a serious issue. Culture on the other hand is a generational effect, that changes over the millenia (historically anyway, pre-industrial revolution). Where some may have certain pride in thier tribe or culture, not often will they break-out in open war due to some slight. Culture is ethereal. Trade is physical. Culture is relative. Am I American or Baby-boomer? Trade is absolute. You either get your shipment of tin from Britain or you don't.

So, since this is a game: how am I to manipulate my own Culture, not to mention another faction's Culture? How about his Economy? I can blockade his ports. That is tactical. Or I can import luxuries for decades to diminish their warrior ethos. That is strategic. The latter one is a process of culture, but both rely on all-mighty Trade.

Someone will say (obtusely) in response to this entire post, "We already can blockade ports." Yes, but oddly they can still produce what ever they want... Let's put some teeth in it, before we go messing around with trying to change the identities of our entire populations. As if any ruler was ever successful at that!

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

I'm not sure what you mean. Instead of classifications such as 'Catholic', 'Orthodox', 'Islam', and 'Heretic' what would you have in your proprosed system?

[I Am Herenow]

Edit

[HistoryProf]

Marcus, you know what?... Honestly, I'm really not sure. I would like to sort it out though. Do you have any ideas? I expect 90% of anything people (myself included) post here will be unworkable from a modder's standpoint. But it's that 10%, that one idea that is a culmination of the various people's ideas, that could be brilliant, if the powers that be can put the idea to the schematic.

What would be perfect is for someone to say, "Oh, there's these four basic types of trade that the religions equate as blah, blah..." Or four trade blocks? Or even three: you don't have to use them all.

So, we have these resources all over the map. If I drop a stack of soldiers on it, what happens? This is the M2TW engine and map base now that we're talking about.

Is there a way to link the resource, say horses, to the production of cavalry units?

Something dramatically different. Just like AoE versus vanilla recruiting.

Mr. I am here now, I am trying to not think about Culture in any form: others are already doing that and have a serious time and access advantage over this thread. I need to gather ideas from people to help present a rock-solid case for the use of Trade. Culture seems to be not something a faction leader to use to gain tactical or even strategic advantage in a military sense and therefore a big snoozer, AFAIC.

Like I said, "Yes, we can blockade ports, but how does that really hurt a city?" It doesn't and therefore should be augmented somehow. Something simple, yet manipulative and crafty. I wish I were a modder, or had one in my pocket! I'm going dig through other peoples' M2TW mods and see if anything rises to the surface.

[Zarax]

Like I said in the other thread, I think I found something slightly more feasible than generic trade.

Grain distribution over population (or even ethnic grain distribution) could be flexible and both horizontally (over different factions) and vertically (over different social strata) pervasive enough to be considered as a "religious factor" at least for the more urbanized factions. I'm confident that something equivalent can be found for the others as well.

This is taking into account a series of factors like the "panem et circenses" attitude shown by many rulers in that period, cultural clashes and the effect that a "famine" had on public order.

Advantages:

- grain distribution was a concrete public order issue in the historical era.

- control or at least influence over the main grain producing regions was vital for many factions and often enough for a casus belli (maybe enough to warrant "crusades").

- "Priests" can be called "royal surveyors" (better title needed) and what they change would be the efficiency of grain distribution over the population.
For simplicity sake 100% efficiency will mean that the population is satisfied by the way grain is distributed and not that it's a perfect distribution.

- "heretics" could be used to represent local powers trying to get resources for their independent means and influence character traits negatively.
Governors could get corruption traits from them and generals penalties on troop morale (imagine a general selling a share of soldier rations).

If the papacy is used the papal rating could be the international point of view on your leader's ability to keep the population happy.
An "excommunication" would mean that your leader is considered weak and your faction is up for grabs.

If possible different FM could be of different "cultures" making vital the right match of governor and city else the numerically more influential culture would cause unrest as the governor would favor other cultures in distribution of resources.

I know the idea is not very refined but it might be a starting point for discussion...

[HistoryProf]

I like it. It's good conceptually. Somone will pop in and say, "No, this is x, y, and z... " But that's ok: I don't think the entire 'religious aspect' needs to be translated into something usable, but that is the type of conversation we as players should be having to help the dev team reflect on possibilities.

[Socal_infidel]

If it helps with this conversation, I think the limit on types of 'religion' is 7. Cheers!

[HistoryProf]

Ok, thanks. I am not sure that every aspect the 'religion trait' needs to be adapted, in fact I would assume the simpler the re-application, the easier the re-writing of script, etc.

Also, perhaps one part of the 'religion trait' say, "Crusades/Jihads" can be used for one thing and "religion as represented in cities as a percentage" can be translated into something totally different/unrelated.

Just obfuscating hypothesis with no basis in fact and probably totally counter-productive, but there it is...

[sirfiggin]

making a point about trade; will the concept of slavery be at all entertained? It was a very lucrative business in the Ancient "Civilized" world- but so was mercantilism, so would it be possible to include a slaver agent? He could reflect the money made in recently conquered territories, mebbie by having the money he makes proportional to the level of foreign culture?

P.S, how many posts required for yeoman level?

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

I still don't get what you all mean exactly. You mean everyone will have 'Well supplied' as religion and heretics will convert to 'low on supplies' religion which will cause unrest?

Keep in mind that characters and building bonuses are what effect religion. You can just have the town convert because the port is blockaded or something.

And remember that there are no cultural penalties in M2TW as there were in RTW. If all factions share the same 'religion' then holding a town that you have just taken will be just as easy as it is to hold a town you started with.

[HistoryProf]

I still don't get what you all mean exactly. You mean everyone will have 'Well supplied' as religion and heretics will convert to 'low on supplies' religion which will cause unrest?

Keep in mind that characters and building bonuses are what effect religion. You can just have the town convert because the port is blockaded or something.

And remember that there are no cultural penalties in M2TW as there were in RTW. If all factions share the same 'religion' then holding a town that you have just taken will be just as easy as it is to hold a town you started with.

That's not exactly how I would advance it. What if a city could be described in various states of supply?

Ex: 100% "Catholic" (level of adherence to catholic = availability of supplies) and whatever corresponding singular or combination of effects can be/should be expressed. But there can be one or more factors outside the city that affect that percentage. Losing trade rights with another faction, blockaded ports, enemy soldiers sitting on a resource or road, famine, disease, etc.

Again, I wouldn't assume characters have to have anything to do with it, nor do crusades or jihads.

I don't think this is the expression I had in my minds eye. However, we are distilling the idea, which is a good thing. Thinking outside the box?

Question: Is the system of citizen happiness in place now in M2TW the best expression of civic order? If the city is in disorder (under 70%) how can the governor collect any taxes or levy any troops?

Also, I think you meant "can't" convert? If so, yes I figured on that.

[Zarax]

I still don't get what you all mean exactly. You mean everyone will have 'Well supplied' as religion and heretics will convert to 'low on supplies' religion which will cause unrest?

Err, no.
By "religion" I would mean the ability of the leader to appease the masses in a populistic way (by distributing grain or similar means), which is how it would affect public order.
Heretics wouldn't convert the religion, they would just represent powers trying to take a share for other purposes and so it would mean that the population would feel the ruler as "unfair" or "corrupt".
Same for generals, what would troops think of a general feeding them low quality rations while he's got a throne in his own tent (just to get an image)?

Keep in mind that characters and building bonuses are what effect religion. You can just have the town convert because the port is blockaded or something.

And remember that there are no cultural penalties in M2TW as there were in RTW. If all factions share the same 'religion' then holding a town that you have just taken will be just as easy as it is to hold a town you started with.

That's where the cultures (meant as religions in game) gets involved.
There are going to be different ethnicities in the game and it can be logically expected that characters of one ethnicity would try to favour their own kin.
So, if in a city there are different ethnicities, how do you think the other ones would react?
Not nicely for sure...

[HistoryProf]

I don't think many people are in favor of having more characters, Zarax. And if I were to say "Trade", I am not sure I would attach any particular commodity to it. I could be wrong, but I don't think any but the largest factions, i.e. Rome, Egypt, were so dependant on grain. However, whereas grain might not have been universal, "commodities" certainly were.

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

Religion in a city cannot be effected by forces outside of the province. Religion can't change because of who you trade with, or what you trade, or if you are blockaded. As I said only buildings and characters can effect Religion. And the effects of buildings are static - if you build a building with +5% conversion it will always have +5% conversion until destroyed or upgraded.

[HistoryProf]

Marcus, that idea you had about re-modelling merchants... perhaps the priests could be re-modelled into a new character? A character that went with the army, like a spy or diplomat. He could adjust the 'religion' in enemy territories... But there are only 7 'religions' and 30 factions....

Forget that, sorry.

Because factions couldn't affect all enemies because some would be of the same religion.

Churches and Mosques could be re-modelled as some building, or something, doesn't have to be a building per se...

Bah!

[Zarax]

I don't think many people are in favor of having more characters, Zarax. And if I were to say "Trade", I am not sure I would attach any particular commodity to it. I could be wrong, but I don't think any but the largest factions, i.e. Rome, Egypt, were so dependent on grain. However, whereas grain might not have been universal, "commodities" certainly were.

For all its history Rome always protected with the maximum strength possible its access to grain imports, and later the emperors adopted in a very specific way the "panem et circenses" policy.
Distribution of grain to the masses (or it being sold at "political prices") has always been a tool to control population happiness.
That is true even for Egypt.
Just because they were an huge grain producer and exporter it doesn't mean that the lower urban classes could afford as much as they needed/wanted.

And... Who said that we need more characters? I'm not suggesting to add any more than vanilla, actually in most cases you would just change their names.
The only extra (if possible) would be that factions would be able to produce priests of different religion.

[HistoryProf]

I only mention the 'largest factions' comment, because I read somewhere that the dev team doesn't like to have game-play issues that are related to only a few factions.

And my 'characters' comment reflected the anticipation that some will argue that M2TW has too many characters as it is. K.I.S.S. will be their mantra.

My opinion is: if it's fun, realistic and easy to manage: do it.

[Giuliano Taverna]

Here is a thought instead of adapting religion to improve the importance of trade is it possible to script huge penalties of unrest and negative trade bonuses for blocking trade routs by land and sea.

I personally would like to see factions be impoverished due to blockade and have massive revolts when they lose their capital after all most every major empire in the ancient world was considered destroyed when they lost their capital for example rome or cathage.

Also considerable unrest if their is any sort of blockade or devastation after all would you be happy if a marauding army destroyer your farm and raped your wife while the local governor has an army defending himself?

I am also not a moder but I am a history buff a romano-phile and a huge fan of the EB 1 and 2.

[Yura92]

well relegion is relly important but you know i relly think its not that important it wasnt that important back then altho culture was i relly think you can add culture in the town info