Multiple Religions

[unmerged(15658)]

Prior to playing Hungary I never worried(much)about religion. Once when I played Portugal I noticed that Tangiers had a high revolt risk. I forget how high it was but I played around with the religion sliders and really wasn't satisfied with the results. Since Tangiers was low in producing income I decided to let her go, and set my religion sliders to benefit the mainland. I sent my navy to go pick up the army that is in Tangiers at the start of the game.

It turned out to be a pretty good stratergy because when I went to war the enemy would attack Tangiers freeing it of the rebels. Since there was an army attacking Tangiers there was less to directly attack Portugal. When peace is made I would get Tangiers back(revolter free)receiving whatever income she produced.

But Hungary is different. Hungary starts with two different religions. No problem. Then two provinces switch to Protestant. Then later on another one goes Reformed. Now I have four different religions. A pain in the ass. Particularly when a war drags out. More so with my newly aquired province, and since my ally is Poland dragged out wars are becoming common. I'll have to leave the alliance with Poland, thats for sure! I'll probably go with Venice. Austria is next door too, but Austria has a higher score then me so I'll want to take them down a couple of notches later on.

So what stratergies and nations does everyone use when playing nations with multiple religions?

 

[unmerged(2410)]

In the great tradition of Frederick (II) the Great I usually play the benevolent, enlightened autocrat. I allign all the sliders. I don't reap any benefits in particular from this strategy, except that I don't have run all over the place putting down rebellions, which I hate with a passion.

As my empires tend to grow very, very large I usually end up with all the different religions in the game inside my borders.

 

[saskganesh]

what i often do is pure evil. i identify the most minor religion in my empire and then set tolerance for this sect to the lowest. this creates revolts which mercilessly crush. over time, the population in the revolting province will drop to below 5000 which means that it can be colonised, whihc means the relegion will change to state relgion.

the genocide option only works if you have a steady supply of colonists and have the resources to mantain large armies in police action duties. i dont think hungary qualifies for either! so when genocide is not an option, then, as per Mjull, i play the enlightened monarch. so, only fight short wars.

 

[Rex Francorum]

Generally, I move the sliders to have no chance of rebellion. If it is possible, I try to tolerate other religions to increase possibilities of making alliances. For example, as Prussia, I generally try to tolerate orthodox if I hope an eventual alliance with Russia.

Presently I am playing Saxony in a game. Support from Russia or muslim countries is not important. At the opposite, the presence of many catholic countries in the area oblige me to tolerate the religion.

 

[Matija]

In EU2 you can use missionary to convert religion....

 

[unmerged(11600)]

I've played both styles, as each fit a different AAR campaign. In my English GC, I set minimal tolerance for anything that wasn't in my realm, but anything I did have I adjusted the tolerances to have no religious revolts anywhere. In my Russian GC, on the other hand, I set the sliders once for the entire game, regardless of what it will cause: absolute tolerance of Orthodox, absolute intolerance of Moslems, and the heretical Christians can split the rest. In effect, any Moslem province gained is going to revolt until the population drops below 5k, at which point I can send settlers to convert it, while I cannot manipulate Catholic or Protestant provinces once their nationalism dies down, at least except by destroying my stability first. The same goes for Kurgan, since I can't set intolerance of pagans.

Think of it as an RPG.

-Pat

 

[Morpheus506]

I personally have never touched the sliders, so i have never developed any strategy except for just conquering people of my own faith.

 

[unmerged(16151)]

Originally posted by mjuul
In the great tradition of Frederick (II) the Great I usually play the benevolent, enlightened autocrat. I allign all the sliders. I don't reap any benefits in particular from this strategy, except that I don't have run all over the place putting down rebellions, which I hate with a passion.

As my empires tend to grow very, very large I usually end up with all the different religions in the game inside my borders.

Agreed. Autocracy works. don't knock it until you have tried it

 

[unmerged(10894)]

The absolute hardest nation to play for this reason is Mamelukes. All 4 of the 4 religions are covered if you have Nuyssaybin. My strategy: Maximize religions that most of the populace are into. In Mamelukes case, minimize toleration of Shi'ite moslems and Catholics and garrison a large army in any needed provinces to neutralize rebels...

 

[Rex Francorum]

Originally posted by Morpheus506
I personally have never touched the sliders, so i have never developed any strategy except for just conquering people of my own faith.

You should. If your country is as big as your desire of conquest, changing religion sliders is a necessity to decrease % of rebellion.

 

[unmerged(16031)]

religions

In one of my first games, playing as russians, I took over persia.

I ended up sending millions of men, to fight against the rebels that popped up all the time.

It teached me to use the religion sliders