Will it be easier to convert the state religion in the future?

[howlling]

There are times when we all want to do weird things.
Coptic/Jewish Byzantium.
Orthodox China.
like that
However, with the current half system of development (Unless there are exceptions like Christianity-Protestantism.), there are times when it is regrettable that it is extremely difficult to convert the state religion unless there are exceptions.
In particular, Judaism and Zoroastrianism disappear so quickly that we cannot even see them.
It is true that converting the state religion is not an easy task, but it is strange to convert after deliberately neglecting the rebels.

In fact, it seems to me that our developers are not interested in this. I'll try to post it anyway. What do you all think?

 

[Junuxx]

Console commands - Europa Universalis 4 Wiki

eu4.paradoxwikis.com

change_religion TUR jewish

Easy enough.

 

[L'Afrique]

It does kinda seem like converting should happen in the opposite order. Currently, except for the "acceptable" swaps, you must tank your nation to marauding zealots. Seems like the ruler should be able to pick whatever religion that they know of, and then the nation tanks to marauding zealots. Who still love Jesus and not Huitzilopotchli or whatever shenanigans the player has done.

 

[Danskjävel]

I don't mind the struggles to actually change a nations religion. It should entail uprisings from numerous other groups than mainly religious rebels, nobels and others who either does not agree with the idea of changing the society's religion or who sees it as an opportunity to depose current ruler et cetera.

My main problem with the current system is that it's totally immersion breaking.

 

[peterbarabas]

Fun fact: The Khazar Khaganate at one point (around 10. century) converted to Judaism, because they didn't want to reliogusly join neither neghbouring empires (Islam, Christian).
So Im favoring the idea, that you can choose whatever religion you want. OFC there need to be consequences

 

[Jia Xu]

Being able to freely choose religions would irreparably break multiplayer. You'd have Orthodox Ottomans and France on day 1. All republic players would be converting to Hindu or something. lol

Religions are very, very strong in this game and for the game to have anything resembling balance, extraordinary shifts in faith need to be limited to gamey tricks.

 

[Lavilledieu]

I also think changing religion is a bit too difficult now. But changing religion like with protestantism would be too free, especially since this interaction gives a lot of missionary strength.
I think a system where the rulers convert first, and then the country follows, would be better. If ruler and country have different religions, then some events can fire about the problems it creates, some of them changing the religion in the provinces. Eventually, after x years of having rulers of that certain religion, you can swap religion at the cost of stability (the loss related to the amount of provinces with this religion) and other stuff.

 

[YellowPress]

Fun fact: The Khazar Khaganate at one point (around 10. century) converted to Judaism, because they didn't want to reliogusly join neither neghbouring empires (Islam, Christian).
So Im favoring the idea, that you can choose whatever religion you want. OFC there need to be consequences

Some khans were jewish, some were muslim, some were christian, they weren't monolithic
Fetishist and american tags picking their religion is fine, ai anhalt suddenly flipping muslim is dumb and should never be allowed to happen

 

[Soreno]

I think it should be possible to switch religion if you own a province with the desired faith. It could be a decision you can take that could require a certain amount of stability, prestige and legitimacy for instance, that would instantly lower these when selected.

The decision will then start a 10 year (maybe length depends on religious unity and size of county) long process where you will navigate events that could involve both conversion of provences and more/less missionary strength in provinces, but also rebels and neighbouring countries and subjects.

Maybe your neighbours and subjects are not fond of your shift in faith. Your neighbours could get a casus belli on you to stop you and your subjects could get liberty desire.

Once the process is complete (and you did not get beat by rebels and/or neighbours), you will have shifted.
I guess this would work a little like the old westernization mechanic.

Of course rebels should still be able to break a county and change its religion and the above mentioned mechanic should be 'easier' than using the rebel way.

 

[peterbarabas]

Some khans were jewish, some were muslim, some were christian, they weren't monolithic
Fetishist and american tags picking their religion is fine, ai anhalt suddenly flipping muslim is dumb and should never be allowed to happen

Yeah, that was my point, many khans (and ruler) picked different religion than the majority of his domain. I highlight one of the extreme case, because the khan picked jewish religion only for politicall reason, without history of that religion in his country.
Thats been said, I highly agreeing with your last sentence, it need to be implement with somekind restricton (but not this majority BS). Oh one more thing... England one point in medieval history almost became sunni... just sayin'

 

[L'Afrique]

Some khans were jewish, some were muslim, some were christian, they weren't monolithic
Fetishist and american tags picking their religion is fine, ai anhalt suddenly flipping muslim is dumb and should never be allowed to happen

Radical religion swaps are almost always dumb, realism-wise. It's purely a player thing. I think the AI should be allowed sometimes though- Ottos take Vienna, Poland is overrun by Russia and Ottos, turks storm Rome, Otto vassals march into the further HRE, Hungary has fallen, christendom is in crisis- maybe the Prince of Anhalt does decide to convert and embrace the new order.

 

[YellowPress]

Yeah, that was my point, many khans (and ruler) picked different religion than the majority of his domain. I highlight one of the extreme case, because the khan picked jewish religion only for politicall reason, without history of that religion in his country.

They're out of period, jews also already existed in eastern Europe by then

Thats been said, I highly agreeing with your last sentence, it need to be implement with somekind restricton (but not this majority BS). Oh one more thing... England one point in medieval history almost became sunni... just sayin'

No it didnt, one garbled diplomatic message doesn't mean anything. The rebranded dinar coin doesnt mean anything either

 

[YellowPress]

Radical religion swaps are almost always dumb, realism-wise. It's purely a player thing. I think the AI should be allowed sometimes though- Ottos take Vienna, Poland is overrun by Russia and Ottos, turks storm Rome, Otto vassals march into the further HRE, Hungary has fallen, christendom is in crisis- maybe the Prince of Anhalt does decide to convert and embrace the new order.

You really want that to be a thing?

 

[Word_Smith]

The EU series is rapidly becoming a game of Mad Libs.

"I'm playing [any country], where I converted to [any religion] via rebels."

I'd rather not see it go further in that direction by making it easier to convert religion. Religion isn't something that a culture changes like a pair of pants. There should be some historical verisimilitude when it comes to religion changes in EU4.

 

[xrws31]

It should probably be based on having
1) a non-overseas border with the religion being converted to
and
2) that border having been in place for some period of time (50 years?)
and maybe also
3) relative power

The scenario where Anhalt converts to Sunni while being surrounded on all sides for thousands of miles by dozens of far more powerful Christian nations, is pretty stupid. But a scenario where Ottomans have conquered all the way to the Rhine, and have consolidated those holdings, then yeah it doesn't seem unreasonable that Anhalt rulers might consider it convenient to convert.

 

[YellowPress]

It should probably be based on having
1) a non-overseas border with the religion being converted to
and
2) that border having been in place for some period of time (50 years?)
and maybe also
3) relative power

The scenario where Anhalt converts to Sunni while being surrounded on all sides for thousands of miles by dozens of far more powerful Christian nations, is pretty stupid. But a scenario where Ottomans have conquered all the way to the Rhine, and have consolidated those holdings, then yeah it doesn't seem unreasonable that Anhalt rulers might consider it convenient to convert.

Coding all that seems to be a far worse idea than coding to prevent ottos actually getting to such a great level, like it being impossible for corruption and autonomy to be at 0, actual supply lines, coalitions being more than just 50 ae and negative relations. There's also extremely few Christian European conversions to islam that I can think of that happened without conquest, just some barbary pirates and circassian imamate, a few British East India Company officials going native

 

[Zander]

The EU series is rapidly becoming a game of Mad Libs.

"I'm playing [any country], where I converted to [any religion] via rebels."

I'd rather not see it go further in that direction by making it easier to convert religion. Religion isn't something that a culture changes like a pair of pants. There should be some historical verisimilitude when it comes to religion changes in EU4.

Note that if you're converting via rebels, it's because that religion IS THE BIGGEST IN YOUR NATION. Yes, you likely took gamey actions to get to that point, but it's honestly harder than it would "realistically" be to convert once you do.

 

[Word_Smith]

Note that if you're converting via rebels, it's because that religion IS THE BIGGEST IN YOUR NATION. Yes, you likely took gamey actions to get to that point, but it's honestly harder than it would "realistically" be to convert once you do.

It's still absurd, no matter how you slice it. Conversion via rebels *should* be a powerful religious group taking control of the government, not 3000 guys from a small village somehow occupying an entire empire while the army of the current regime sits and watches.

 

[Nostalgium]

It's still absurd, no matter how you slice it. Conversion via rebels *should* be a powerful religious group taking control of the government, not 3000 guys from a small village somehow occupying an entire empire while the army of the current regime sits and watches.

Speaking of the current regime, Religious rebels should probably replace the current ruler/dynasty as well. I don't find it particularly immersive that Shia zealots rising up due to oppression in a Georgia that invaded Persia, storming the nation and breaking its government would then just say "OK, now convert to Islam, and we'll just forget the brutal oppression and multiple conversion attempts that triggered this uprising in the first place". Same goes for Heretics. Perhaps even more so for Heretics, considering how brutal sectarian internal conflict can be.

 

[YellowPress]

Speaking of the current regime, Religious rebels should probably replace the current ruler/dynasty as well. I don't find it particularly immersive that Shia zealots rising up due to oppression in a Georgia that invaded Persia, storming the nation and breaking its government would then just say "OK, now convert to Islam, and we'll just forget the brutal oppression and multiple conversion attempts that triggered this uprising in the first place". Same goes for Heretics. Perhaps even more so for Heretics, considering how brutal sectarian internal conflict can be.

Was thinking about this the other day, when you conquer land, release as vassal then do a vassal reconquest, should you really have access to all those cores if the vassal is a completely different dynasty than what ruled the area at game start?