So, I've never really delved too heavily into the religious aspect of this game, so I was wondering what religion of the two, if any, is better than the other. Pros and cons of both? If it matters, I'm a superblobbed Hungary.
Reformed vs Protestantism?
- Thread starter geminisama
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
In very general, broad strokes: Reformed is better for small, trading countries, Protestantism better for larger, production-heavy countries.
In your case, without knowing anything other than what you posted, I would probably say Protestantism.
In your case, without knowing anything other than what you posted, I would probably say Protestantism.
I've heard this statement time and time again, but what exactly is the bonus of staying catholic?
5 % extra compete chance (+ 10 % more trade income obviously) for reformed, and 10 % extra production and tax for Protestant is in and of itself a great boast in SP -- and especially in MP. Catholics have 33 % less stab cost, but considering income starts to pick up with provincial stab cost by 1500 and the comparatively few "mass stab event" after the reformation, that seems less important. Reforming as a latin country without the automatic conversion process of the northern countries can be a pain, but if well managed, it puts one in a good position.
More diplomats, controlling a cardinal gives you prestige and an infamy reduction, there's a cultural descisions for more magistrates (Charter a Guild of St Luke) and of course the Crusader War bonuses.
Mind you at the end of the day it really depends on your playing style.
When playing in Europe the crusader war bonus isn't that great (unless you exploit it by declaring a war and not doing any actual fighting) and I've seldom found myself lacking any cardinals.
A real advantage of staying Catholic is that the reformation tends not to be that effective, thus most countries will stay Catholic, turning Protestant will estrange most of them. On the other hand, if you're a warmonger, this is actually a boon.
A real advantage of staying Catholic is that the reformation tends not to be that effective, thus most countries will stay Catholic, turning Protestant will estrange most of them. On the other hand, if you're a warmonger, this is actually a boon.
You get a divine blessing by the pope
Ahh, it burns! This is reason enough to leave the Church!
Good points. Depends on situation, but I agree in particular that the reformation tends to be sadly ineffective in supplying more allies to the dissident branches.
If you intend to colonize , staying catholic helps , especially if you have a ruler not skilled in administration
If you want to expand a lot , the cardinals help reduce BB a little , but I don't like having too many provinces anyway.
If you want to expand a lot , the cardinals help reduce BB a little , but I don't like having too many provinces anyway.
The general idea would be if you're a small trading nation you should go reformed, if you're a large empire and not really "in" europe, like a hungary that holy warred the east rather than took the west, protestant would be better for the production bonus. If however you are a large nation based primarily in europe, catholicism is best so that you can monopolize the holy see for the benefits of being curia, infamy reduction for controlled cardinals, and spamming the hell out of the excommunicate button and annexing the targeted nation for very little infamy, which is then quickly burned by your controlled cardinal bonus.
The one really strong point about catholic (which makes it superior over other religions) is the fact, that you can abuse the curia to gain quite a lot of infamy reduction. Especially if you have the pope as a vassal (or otherwise permanently at max relations), and conquer a lot, especially in Europe, but stay quite low at infamy, you are at some point almost guaranteed to permanently control the curia, giving you nice bonus and giving you heavy infamy reduction. The maximum may be hard to reach, but -0,5 and more is still pretty good, if you want to do huge conquests.
On the other hand, reformed has a few special benifits for colonial nations. It is true that catholic gives an additional 20 % placement chance, but reformed gives 10 % extra colonial growth. The "%" is a little misleading since it's actually 10 colonist/year. Placement is usually not that big a problem unless the aggressiveness is very high. Personally, I find the growth aspect better, unless every 20 ducats for placing colonists count. Furthermore, the reform penalty of -10% tax efficiency counts less for colonial nations since the tariff equation does not take modified taxes into account (as far as I understand it). One of the main incomes of colonial nation are usually trading in associated CoTs, to which the trade goods in one's provinces flow. At this stage, the trade efficiency benefit gives a good result.
The reduced intolerance may be a little benificial when conquering barbarians in the colonial sphere, but its of minimal importance.
Keep in mind however that by the time of the reformation you likely already have a rather large colonial empire. Unless you're a late comer (in terms of how long it takes a player, god knows it takes the AI forever to get a few colonies), you will likely want to refrain from changing religions due to the vast amounts of land you will have to convert, making remaining catholic all the more appealing for someone going the colonial route.
You're sure about that? Barring the Iberian states, you're not likely to reach anything worth colonizing until the late 1490s at least. It's not a big loss to put off a decade for the Reformation to start off, a few more years for Reforming and regaining stability, and then rocking out the rest of the game as an awesome Reformed empire.
My usual preferences:
* Catholic for major conquests starting in Europe. I think virtually any World Conquest should involve staying Catholic, as the unique Catholic functions - excommunication and cardinal control - are well-designed to allow for conquest of Catholic provinces for relatively minimal infamy. Consider: a controlled Curia, with the Cabinet NI, an Embassy, 6* Diplomat, and 8 DIP ruler, yields an annual Infamy reduction of 4 BB/yr.
* Reformed for a peaceful country focusing on minimal expansion. Peaceful states are going to be trading all over the world, which means the trade efficiency bonus is a good pickup. Add in the fact that peaceful countries can focus on colonization, another strength of Reformed states, and going Reformed is definitely the best pick for peaceful states.
* I never really found a good use for going Protestant; the main apparent advantage is the ability to rack up Imperial Authority by forcing Catholic states to accept religious unity, and to use the Cleansing of Heresy CB with more effectiveness. Having said that, though, the advantages to being Catholic seem to outweigh these two perks. The production bonus is nice, though.
My usual preferences:
* Catholic for major conquests starting in Europe. I think virtually any World Conquest should involve staying Catholic, as the unique Catholic functions - excommunication and cardinal control - are well-designed to allow for conquest of Catholic provinces for relatively minimal infamy. Consider: a controlled Curia, with the Cabinet NI, an Embassy, 6* Diplomat, and 8 DIP ruler, yields an annual Infamy reduction of 4 BB/yr.
* Reformed for a peaceful country focusing on minimal expansion. Peaceful states are going to be trading all over the world, which means the trade efficiency bonus is a good pickup. Add in the fact that peaceful countries can focus on colonization, another strength of Reformed states, and going Reformed is definitely the best pick for peaceful states.
* I never really found a good use for going Protestant; the main apparent advantage is the ability to rack up Imperial Authority by forcing Catholic states to accept religious unity, and to use the Cleansing of Heresy CB with more effectiveness. Having said that, though, the advantages to being Catholic seem to outweigh these two perks. The production bonus is nice, though.
One thing everyone overestimates is the time needed to convert. If you know what you are doing you can convert within under 10 years without a noticeable break in either Income or strength of the country. Even if you have a large colonial Empire, converting it is not that hard. If you are +2 narrowminded when the reformation hits (which the big colonizers probably will be) and you take Mecca, Judea and/or Rome you will have something like 3 or 4 missionaries a year, which means you can convert awefully fast. As a reformed nation income is of no worry at all. Even in Multiplayer I managed to reliably gain something like 4-5k income as soon as i converted.
The problem lies in the fact that converting a province increases revolt risk, and having revolts popping up in far away colonies isn't an ideal situation, especially when some of your colonies won't have forts and if they get occupied they will be forced to change religion. Converting an empire you control in europe is no problem, but converting a colonial empire can be a real pain, especially if you're still in the process of colonizing more lands, making it difficult to afford a powerful enough army to handle more than a few revolts.
Why wouldnt you build lvl 1 forts in every province? High WE would produce revolts there anyway. And as for colonies: By that time you should have not gone to far inlands, so you can use transports to get your troops into coastal provinces within a few months, its a bit micromanage-y but its okay. Money should never be a problem in the first place, since both protestant (high census tax) and reformed(insanely high trade) should give you basically limitless money to play around with.
Negative stability from just converting, intolerance, and working missionary add up to much higher revolt risk than war exhaustion would, not counting the max which I see no reason for a colonizing nation to be anywhere near.
The question of forts in every province comes down to finances. Prior to converting and receiving the monetary benefits, a nation has to either finance his colonies, and ignore forts for a time, or colonize at a much slower rate, and build forts as colonies become provinces. It's just unreasonable to try both, you won't be able to maintain your colonies while at the same time trying to dish out 47 ducats for a fort every time one of them turns into a province unless you have very few colonies running at any one time.
The question of forts in every province comes down to finances. Prior to converting and receiving the monetary benefits, a nation has to either finance his colonies, and ignore forts for a time, or colonize at a much slower rate, and build forts as colonies become provinces. It's just unreasonable to try both, you won't be able to maintain your colonies while at the same time trying to dish out 47 ducats for a fort every time one of them turns into a province unless you have very few colonies running at any one time.