From the makers of the Endless games.
First dev diary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBYzh3qDibY&feature=emb_logo
What was the last non-Civ game that tried to cover the same scope? Call to Power 2?
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1124300/HUMANKIND/
QuoteHOW FAR WILL YOU PUSH HUMANKIND?
HUMANKIND is Amplitude Studios' magnum opus, a Historical Turn-Based Strategy game where YOU will re-write the entire narrative of humankind – a convergence of culture, history, and values that allows you to create a civilization that is as unique as you are.
One Million Civilizations
Create your own civilization by combining 60 historical cultures from the Bronze to the Modern Age.
Begin as Ancient Egypt, then evolve into the Romans, the Khmers, or perhaps the Vikings.
Each culture brings its own special gameplay layer, leading to near-endless outcomes.
What civilization will you shape?
In the Eyes of Posterity
The journey matters more than destination. Fame is a new and unifying victory condition.
Every great deed you accomplish, every moral choice you make, every battle won will build your fame and leave a lasting impact on the world. The player with the most fame will win the game.
Will you be the one to leave the deepest mark on the world?
More than History, it is your Story
Face historical events, lead renowned figures of humankind, and make scientific breakthroughs.
Discover the natural wonders of the world or build the most remarkable creations of humankind.
Each game element is historically authentic. Combine them to build your own vision of the world.
How will you Change the Course of HUMANKIND?
A Tactical World
Show off your tactical skills by mastering terrain elevation with city-building and full tactical battles.
Keep one step ahead of other civilizations through trade and subtle diplomacy.
Call upon your allies to transform an epic battle into a full-scale eight-player world war!
What strategy will you mastermind?
These are just some of the amazing things you will be able to do in HUMANKIND.
More to be revealed soon!
PC Gamer article from last year with more details:
https://www.pcgamer.com/humankind-rewrites-the-rules-of-civilization/
(https://steamcdn-a.akamaihd.net/steam/apps/1124300/ss_7a1998fad92340a33344ddbc32077fed0cfe1b49.1920x1080.jpg)
(https://steamcdn-a.akamaihd.net/steam/apps/1124300/ss_f181d2d90b5bc38c5d58d1279603dbd53175ebb3.1920x1080.jpg)
(https://steamcdn-a.akamaihd.net/steam/apps/1124300/ss_8917cb86fa0812cf54038183eda3c1fba0b69334.1920x1080.jpg)
(https://steamcdn-a.akamaihd.net/steam/apps/1124300/ss_13367de9ac381dc31aade325da6e124b432ee893.1920x1080.jpg)
(https://steamcdn-a.akamaihd.net/steam/apps/1124300/ss_f5e9d63b9e249786585cab26abc254ec59d70208.1920x1080.jpg)
(https://steamcdn-a.akamaihd.net/steam/apps/1124300/ss_e0bbcce6b00c8597975bc40e1dd8e60b6e73f599.1920x1080.jpg)
I have this on my Steam wishlist - very much looking forward to it.
Ditto, CC. I put it on my wishlist some time ago when I found out about it. I loved the Endless series, with some reservations, and have high expectations of this.
It is a unifying Languish game. So, yes, I'm hyped for it.
it's on my to watch list... I hope they succeed
Me too
When's our first MP game?
Probably a week after it comes out. :D
Will it be playable on 10 year old pcs?
Big fan of their Endless games. They are all very playable and always come up with interesting wrinkles to old formulas.
Civ VI was a bit of a bust for me, so looking forward to this.
Undecided at this point. I've not been a fan of the Endless games (-_-), so I'll want to see more than just CIV looking screenshots.
Yes there are lots to be impressed with in the Endless games, but they all seem to be a bit off. Endless Legend in particular failed to click with me.
I hope this is going to inject some competition into this genre. I feel like Firaxis has been off the boil lately, both with Civ and with XCOM franchises.
Quote from: garbon on February 07, 2020, 05:19:20 AM
Undecided at this point. I've not been a fan of the Endless games (-_-), so I'll want to see more than just CIV looking screenshots.
There is much more on their website explaining the game mechanics if you are interested.
Wow, this looks so very good! I'm a big fan of this type game. I hadn't heard of it until seeing this thread. :) I'll also be looking to get it.
Will follow this, thanks.
Big fan of Amplitude. Especially their UI and race design.
Quote from: Tamas on February 07, 2020, 08:51:54 AM
Yes there are lots to be impressed with in the Endless games, but they all seem to be a bit off. Endless Legend in particular failed to click with me.
Me too.
Quote from: DGuller on February 07, 2020, 09:32:39 AM
I hope this is going to inject some competition into this genre. I feel like Firaxis has been off the boil lately, both with Civ and with XCOM franchises.
Xcom2 was awesome dude.
Quote from: Zoupa on February 08, 2020, 08:29:58 PM
Quote from: DGuller on February 07, 2020, 09:32:39 AM
I hope this is going to inject some competition into this genre. I feel like Firaxis has been off the boil lately, both with Civ and with XCOM franchises.
Xcom2 was awesome dude.
The base game was good, thought not without flaws. The DLCs were complete shit, though, and took the game in exactly the wrong direction.
You are as wrong as a human being can be.
The DLC made for a huge amount of additionnal gameplay for 20 bucks and were also awesome. I don't know what you're smoking :mad:
I guess I'm just a big non-fan of scripted content in XCOM. I don't view it as a game that you play through once, I view it as a challenging and open-ended game that you go through many times while trying different strategies. It's more of a Civ type game than a Call of Duty type of game in my mind. If you're the kind to play through the campaign once and move on, then I can see how your standards may be low enough to find the DLCs acceptable.
Quote from: DGuller on February 12, 2020, 03:06:25 PM
I guess I'm just a big non-fan of scripted content in XCOM. I don't view it as a game that you play through once, I view it as a challenging and open-ended game that you go through many times while trying different strategies. It's more of a Civ type game than a Call of Duty type of game in my mind. If you're the kind to play through the campaign once and move on, then I can see how your standards may be low enough to find the DLCs acceptable.
Classic difficulty and ironman. I ended up playing the game a gazillion times trying different strategies and tactics, before I managed to complete it. You are right, I am not sure I'll complete the campaign again, but after well over 200 hours, that's something I can live with.
Looks very interesting.
New video about terrain: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT2hLlCj5z4&feature=emb_logo
Claiming Territory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDGnigR6uQo
Fame (This is how you win)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIpBX2RozJk
Nice, I've been waiting for a long time for Civ to come up with the idea of dynamic provinces rather than boring circles. Real provinces are often very far from being geometrically compact. Hopefully there will also be mechanics to promote a wide spread of viable province sizes, from German principalities on one end to frozen Russian or Canadian wastelands on the other end.
I really like the idea of outposts growing into their own cities or becoming part of an expanding city. I also like the idea of a more direct link between surrounding geography and what can be built. Lots of great ideas here.
Outposts in...Civ III (I think)...were one of the only things I liked about that version
Quote from: PDH on May 25, 2020, 03:01:54 PM
Outposts in...Civ III (I think)...were one of the only things I liked about that version
I liked the unit graphics a lot in 3. The overall visuals were lovely, but the landscape a bit drab.
The cultures of the Bronze Age: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k90G9bHyk_w
The cultures of the Classical Age: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wk4zt-IGeWs
I have begun following that guy mainly because he did such a good job with the first intro pieces to Humankind. I liked the Bronze age piece and am looking forward to the other ones he does.
Looks like they've pushed publication back to 2021 now.
Quote from: Josephus on June 13, 2020, 01:38:29 PM
Looks like they've pushed publication back to 2021 now.
Good, I am not sure how I would resolve the dilemma of what to play if that came out too. This is the golden age for strategy games :)
Six minutes of gameplay, Alpha build
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azcnslbGBYc
Looks good to me
PartyElite
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYbJyzRv2XE
PotatoMcWhiskey
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71bTl185ZEo
(https://i.imgur.com/MOFKgmI.jpg)
amphitheatron :bleeding:
Quote from: Maladict on July 12, 2020, 12:24:29 PM
amphitheatron :bleeding:
You don't like it when the classical name is used instead of the modern one? Or is it that you don't think an amphitheatron is a good choice for the unique building for the Greeks?
I'm surprised that they include Mycenaeans and Greeks, what with one being the successor of the other, for all intents and purposes. They could have added the Hittites or China instead.
Quote from: grumbler on July 12, 2020, 02:19:40 PM
Quote from: Maladict on July 12, 2020, 12:24:29 PM
amphitheatron :bleeding:
You don't like it when the classical name is used instead of the modern one? Or is it that you don't think an amphitheatron is a good choice for the unique building for the Greeks?
There were no amphitheaters until after Greece became a Roman province, and only a few were ever built in the Greek world. They are not places where plays were performed. The icon also shows it to be a regular theater (although it might be Roman rather than Greek, it's hard to make out). Using the ancient word when the English word is commonplace can be a bit sad, but using it when you mean something else entirely is :bleeding:
Quote from: Syt on July 12, 2020, 02:34:00 PM
I'm surprised that they include Mycenaeans and Greeks, what with one being the successor of the other, for all intents and purposes. They could have added the Hittites or China instead.
The have the Zhou dysnasty as one of the Bronze Age civs.
I'm sure there will be tons of DLC civs
Quote from: Maladict on July 12, 2020, 02:55:17 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 12, 2020, 02:19:40 PM
Quote from: Maladict on July 12, 2020, 12:24:29 PM
amphitheatron :bleeding:
You don't like it when the classical name is used instead of the modern one? Or is it that you don't think an amphitheatron is a good choice for the unique building for the Greeks?
There were no amphitheaters until after Greece became a Roman province, and only a few were ever built in the Greek world. They are not places where plays were performed. The icon also shows it to be a regular theater (although it might be Roman rather than Greek, it's hard to make out). Using the ancient word when the English word is commonplace can be a bit sad, but using it when you mean something else entirely is :bleeding:
Aren't the game devs French? Might be translation issues?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 12, 2020, 08:12:31 PM
Aren't the game devs French? Might be translation issues?
I don't think so, French uses the same distinction (amphithéâtre/théâtre).
I've just looked up the difference and it's not a distinction that's survived in English. We would use amphitheatre to describe things that aren't in the round - so modern day settings like the Minack Theatre in Cornwall, or full in the round settings would be described as amphitheatres. I think it's more to do with the bowl/scoop shape than anything else.
Quote from: Sheilbh on July 13, 2020, 03:26:25 AM
I've just looked up the difference and it's not a distinction that's survived in English. We would use amphitheatre to describe things that aren't in the round - so modern day settings like the Minack Theatre in Cornwall, or full in the round settings would be described as amphitheatres. I think it's more to do with the bowl/scoop shape than anything else.
It is very much a distinction when talking about Greek and Roman buildings. No archaeologist, classicist or ancient historian would ever make that mistake, nor would the ancients as far as I know. An amphitheatre has the full 360 degrees, a theatre 180 degrees (Roman) or slightly more (Greek).
Sure, but it's not a distinction in modern usage of those words.
Quote from: Sheilbh on July 13, 2020, 05:00:06 AM
Sure, but it's not a distinction in modern usage of those words.
I'm only pointing out that these developers, trying to create some kind of historical accuracy, have made an inexcusable mistake.
Your defense of sloppy modern day word use is worrying but I won't argue against it. :P
Quote from: Maladict on July 13, 2020, 06:30:33 AM
I'm only pointing out that these developers, trying to create some kind of historical accuracy, have made an inexcusable mistake.
Your defense of sloppy modern day word use is worrying but I won't argue against it. :P
:lol: I suppose my point is being understood is more important than being right and I think in modern English the distinction between amphitheatre and theatre is whether there's a roof rather than the actual shape.
But I am a savage when it comes to these issues :blush:
I'd argue that most people hearing the word "amphitheater" will associate it primarily with the Greek theaters. And when they think of the Roman round amhitheater they'd probably refer to it as, (thanks Gladiator movies) an arena. :P
It doesn't help that there's many modern venues these days that are called amphitheater but are not circular.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_contemporary_amphitheatres
Actually, it's one of those things I'd expect to see on QI. "Which of these is an amphitheater?" Or "In Classical Greece, what where the venues called where tragedies and comedies were played?" (With a klaxon waiting if someone says "amphitheatre" :D )
Quote from: Syt on July 13, 2020, 06:54:16 AM
I'd argue that most people hearing the word "amphitheater" will associate it primarily with the Greek theaters. And when they think of the Roman round amhitheater they'd probably refer to it as, (thanks Gladiator movies) an arena. :P
I know, I've had to reconsider some friendships over this matter. :(
Man, this thread has gone all Languish.
Quote from: Syt on July 12, 2020, 02:34:00 PM
I'm surprised that they include Mycenaeans and Greeks, what with one being the successor of the other, for all intents and purposes. They could have added the Hittites or China instead.
There are lots of civs there that didn't exist simultaneously. The Harappans were contemporaries of the Sumerians and were more than a thousand years gone by the time of the legendary founding of Rome.
Quote from: Maladict on July 13, 2020, 03:36:31 AM
It is very much a distinction when talking about Greek and Roman buildings. No archaeologist, classicist or ancient historian would ever make that mistake, nor would the ancients as far as I know. An amphitheatre has the full 360 degrees, a theatre 180 degrees (Roman) or slightly more (Greek).
Now that I've investigated more, I can see why you are saying this, but would point out that the audience for the game likely doesn't include archaeologists, classicists or ancient historians. Seems to me to be an error about as important (or trivial) as showing Republican Romans in the
lorica segmentata.
Quote from: grumbler on July 13, 2020, 11:31:22 AM
Quote from: Maladict on July 13, 2020, 03:36:31 AM
It is very much a distinction when talking about Greek and Roman buildings. No archaeologist, classicist or ancient historian would ever make that mistake, nor would the ancients as far as I know. An amphitheatre has the full 360 degrees, a theatre 180 degrees (Roman) or slightly more (Greek).
Now that I've investigated more, I can see why you are saying this, but would point out that the audience for the game likely doesn't include archaeologists, classicists or ancient historians.
Not anymore, no :P
Quote
Seems to me to be an error about as important (or trivial) as showing Republican Romans in the lorica segmentata.
That's probably true. In my social circles you'd get savaged over an error like that, Languish often seems like a similar place. But not today, apparently :)
Quote from: Syt on July 12, 2020, 02:34:00 PM
I'm surprised that they include Mycenaeans and Greeks, what with one being the successor of the other, for all intents and purposes. They could have added the Hittites or China instead.
Also they seem to conceive of the Mycenaeans as an entirely militarily focused civ - which seems to be based on the presumed association with the Troojan War epic. I'm not aware of strong evidence to suggest they were more militaristic or militarily effective then say the Hittites or NK Egypt. I personal think of the Mycenaeans as a trading civ with sophisticated administration for its time and place.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 13, 2020, 03:49:41 PM
Quote from: Syt on July 12, 2020, 02:34:00 PM
I'm surprised that they include Mycenaeans and Greeks, what with one being the successor of the other, for all intents and purposes. They could have added the Hittites or China instead.
Also they seem to conceive of the Mycenaeans as an entirely militarily focused civ - which seems to be based on the presumed association with the Troojan War epic. I'm not aware of strong evidence to suggest they were more militaristic or militarily effective then say the Hittites or NK Egypt. I personal think of the Mycenaeans as a trading civ with sophisticated administration for its time and place.
Kim-Hotep?
Also, the Trojan War epic what?
Quote from: Maladict on July 13, 2020, 02:24:52 PM
That's probably true. In my social circles you'd get savaged over an error like that, Languish often seems like a similar place. But not today, apparently :)
:lol: I am an utter savage over the classical world. I've read bits and pieces but to be honest I'm just not that interested. I've been to Rome multiple times but I don't think I've ever been to the forum etc :ph34r:
Quote from: Sheilbh on July 13, 2020, 05:47:30 PM
Quote from: Maladict on July 13, 2020, 02:24:52 PM
That's probably true. In my social circles you'd get savaged over an error like that, Languish often seems like a similar place. But not today, apparently :)
:lol: I am an utter savage over the classical world. I've read bits and pieces but to be honest I'm just not that interested. I've been to Rome multiple times but I don't think I've ever been to the forum etc :ph34r:
:rolleyes:
:cry:
Quote from: Sheilbh on July 13, 2020, 05:47:30 PM
Quote from: Maladict on July 13, 2020, 02:24:52 PM
That's probably true. In my social circles you'd get savaged over an error like that, Languish often seems like a similar place. But not today, apparently :)
:lol: I am an utter savage over the classical world. I've read bits and pieces but to be honest I'm just not that interested. I've been to Rome multiple times but I don't think I've ever been to the forum etc :ph34r:
What are you doing here?
:P
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 14, 2020, 09:27:27 AM
What are you doing here?
:P
My interest picks up after the Romans :ph34r:
He said after the Romans, so post-1453.
I imagine there will be a ton of cultural DLCs. I can already think of three for each of the first three eras we know about.
Archaic - Sumerian, Polynesian, Hittite Empire,
Classical - Incan Empire, Han China, Etruscan,
Medieval - Song China, Delhi Sultanate, Goryeo Kingdom
Here's a really good article on the game. I quoted the best bit
https://www.pcgamesn.com/humankind/best-culture?amp
Quote
...
HUMANKIND CIVICS AND IDEOLOGY
As you play, you'll get event pop-ups that, as leader of your people, will ask you to make executive decisions that will shape your civilisation's outlook on the world. Some of these are triggered by things you are doing as you play: when I build five military units, I'm asked who should fight for the empire? Conscripts or professional soldiers? Others, though, seem more random, answerable only to the twists of fate that throw us all. A few choice examples: should we follow a solar or lunar calendar? Should scribes, moneylenders, or tithe collectors be the first to apply the radical mathematical concept of 'zero'? And should we use cats or ferrets to hunt the mice infesting our granaries?
Some of these decisions – like the army composition one, as you see in the image above – enable you to pass a law by spending a Civics point, unlocking a permanent buff (conscription means 20% cheaper units, while professionalism means +1 stronger troops), while others, like dividing by zero, steer you down short event chains that might help or hinder your empire on the world map. All decisions will, however, nudge your empire along one of four different sliders that represent your outlook. These are geopolitics (nationalist vs globalist), economics (individualist vs collectivist), politics (authoritarian vs liberal), and culture (traditionalist vs progressive). Each slider confers a buff of some kind, which gets stronger at its extremes: a more authoritarian government gets more FIMS (food, industry, money, science) yields on the capital, while a liberal one gets more FIMS on cities without an administrator – the obvious choice if you're playing 'wide', in strategy parlance.
These systems determine your success in projecting soft power. A 'tall', well-developed civ, with lots of civic buildings, no instability from rapid expansion or conquest, and plenty of investment in influence, will be able to build a powerful culture that'll have a strong impact on its neighbours. The people of rival civs may demand that their leaders adopt laws similar to your own, may rebel against them if they don't, and may resist if they try to go to war against you.
...
Is there a cutscene when you divide by zero?
Quote from: Sheilbh on July 13, 2020, 05:47:30 PM
Quote from: Maladict on July 13, 2020, 02:24:52 PM
That's probably true. In my social circles you'd get savaged over an error like that, Languish often seems like a similar place. But not today, apparently :)
:lol: I am an utter savage over the classical world. I've read bits and pieces but to be honest I'm just not that interested. I've been to Rome multiple times but I don't think I've ever been to the forum etc :ph34r:
That's commendable. I wish all savages had refrained from going to the forum :(
I just assumed that a funny thing happened to Shelf on the way there. :sleep:
(https://www.comedy.co.uk/images/library/comedies/180x200_eps/f/further_up_pompeii_lwt.jpg)
Quote from: The Brain on July 13, 2020, 03:54:39 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 13, 2020, 03:49:41 PM
Quote from: Syt on July 12, 2020, 02:34:00 PM
I'm surprised that they include Mycenaeans and Greeks, what with one being the successor of the other, for all intents and purposes. They could have added the Hittites or China instead.
Also they seem to conceive of the Mycenaeans as an entirely militarily focused civ - which seems to be based on the presumed association with the Troojan War epic. I'm not aware of strong evidence to suggest they were more militaristic or militarily effective then say the Hittites or NK Egypt. I personal think of the Mycenaeans as a trading civ with sophisticated administration for its time and place.
Kim-Hotep?
Also, the Trojan War epic what?
It's commonly known as The Iliad.
So far for the early modern period we have the Dutch, the Iroquois, Tokugawa Japan, and Joseon Korea.
I'd expect Ming China, the Ottoman Empire, the Mughal Empire and Spain to be there for sure. The remaining two...? An Italian city state to represent the Renaissance? Bourbon France perhaps?
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1271140/HUMANKIND__OpenDev/
I am sorry but that is VERY worrying. Such a fairly high profile game and you go "open dev"? That means they are throwing in the towel.
Quote from: Tamas on July 31, 2020, 07:24:57 AM
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1271140/HUMANKIND__OpenDev/
I am sorry but that is VERY worrying. Such a fairly high profile game and you go "open dev"? That means they are throwing in the towel.
They've done the same for Endless Space and Endless Legend. It's just how they roll, I guess.
I don't think it's a high profile game at all too.
Quote from: Tamas on July 31, 2020, 07:24:57 AM
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1271140/HUMANKIND__OpenDev/
I am sorry but that is VERY worrying. Such a fairly high profile game and you go "open dev"? That means they are throwing in the towel.
Some of the greatest software out there is open source... why not a game as well? I wonder if they actually provide the tool chain to build though?
I think there's some confusion. In the past, open dev for Amplitude just meant that they got the community involved in designing features or what to add to the game. It wasn't the same as being open source. :unsure:
From their website:
QuoteWHAT IS OPENDEV?
OpenDev is our new approach to community-driven game development. It allows you to join the dev team and help shape the game during its production.
Starting June 13th, register and get a chance to get access to 3 time-limited scenarios focusing on specific core features of the game (exploration, tactical battles, basic city management). Each scenario concludes with a game design survey that will help our dev team level-up the game!
I don't know. Sounds Russian to me.
There is a week long free beta play through of, I think 100 turns. They just ask that you answer some questions when you finish it. You can replay it as many times as you want during the week.
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 24, 2020, 10:29:39 AM
There is a week long free beta play through of, I think 100 turns. They just ask that you answer some questions when you finish it. You can replay it as many times as you want during the week.
:cool:
Thanks for that CC, nice find, I'll give it a go.
Any of you who try it, please AAR here
Not really enough turns for an ARR.
But there is a lot going on. Interesting choices to make regarding civics, religious values, diplomacy, along with the usual tech and development. I really like the fact city zones are as big as you want to build them.
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 24, 2020, 11:58:45 PM
Not really enough turns for an ARR.
But there is a lot going on. Interesting choices to make regarding civics, religious values, diplomacy, along with the usual tech and development. I really like the fact city zones are as big as you want to build them.
So, you like?
Quote from: Josephus on October 25, 2020, 06:59:20 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 24, 2020, 11:58:45 PM
Not really enough turns for an ARR.
But there is a lot going on. Interesting choices to make regarding civics, religious values, diplomacy, along with the usual tech and development. I really like the fact city zones are as big as you want to build them.
So, you like?
You can try it, the demo is available thru Stadia.
Quote from: Josephus on October 25, 2020, 06:59:20 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 24, 2020, 11:58:45 PM
Not really enough turns for an ARR.
But there is a lot going on. Interesting choices to make regarding civics, religious values, diplomacy, along with the usual tech and development. I really like the fact city zones are as big as you want to build them.
So, you like?
Yes, its going to be a great game. But easy enough for you to see for yourself. You just need to sign up to Stadia with an email address and decline all their offerings.
QuotePlanned Release Date: April 2021
Pre-Purchase HUMANKIND™ Digital Deluxe Edition Now
:lol:
Quote from: Maladict on October 27, 2020, 03:37:33 PM
QuotePlanned Release Date: April 2021
Pre-Purchase HUMANKIND™ Digital Deluxe Edition Now
:lol:
Dman. I'll have forgotten about it by then.
Jesus, these timelines. Paradox would already be on their fourth DLC by this point, and only a year or two away from having a working game.
Quote from: DGuller on October 28, 2020, 11:13:04 AM
Jesus, these timelines. Paradox would already be on their fourth DLC by this point, and only a year or two away from having a working game.
:lmfao:
QuoteFrom December 15th at 16:00 CET (10:00 EST, 7:00 PST) to December 28th at 16:00 CET, anybody who has pre-purchased Humankind on Steam can try out the new (English language only) Lucy OpenDev.
This is the biggest OpenDev scenario we have released yet: four full eras and seven AI opponents! Lead your people for more than 100 turns from the Neolithic to the end of the Early Modern Era and try any of the forty different cultures in these eras. Ten thousand potential combinations should keep even the most dedicated of our players busy for a while!
I shall report back :cool:
I really like the design of this game. So many meaningful decisions; so many options for development; so much flexibility.
So much replayability potential
Not sure it's gonna be a Civ killer at this rate: looks like release is now pushed back till August.
Maybe they plan to kill Civ 7. :P
Quote from: Solmyr on March 25, 2021, 10:23:18 AM
Maybe they plan to kill Civ 7. :P
I think they went to the George R. R. Martin Finishing School
I guess it is tricky. If you are taking on Civ probably feel pressure to have a strong launch.
Better they push it off than sell trash. Paradox can get away with that because after 20 years I'm used to it. Less so with other companies.
Looking forward to this game. I just want it to be fun, unique and have immersive game play. That looks like what they're going for.
Played the beta that's currently available if you pre-purchased. There's no map randomization, and you can't create your own avatar. You can play for 200 turns up to age of Industry. I dropped the difficulty a bit to learn.
Overall I really like what I see. It feels like a good upgrade from Endless Legend.
Postive
- City management
I liked the district system better than in Civ6 as its less straightjacketed by bonuses etc. There's synergies, of course, but they feel a lot less like a puzzle game to me. On top there's the infrastructure which are benefits that don't require a district (like improving water supply via fountains and aqueducts, or libraries to improve science). I noticed that I paid not much attention to those. :D
- Outposts and Expansion
The province system from Endless Legend comes back. You can claim a territory by erecting an outpost. Outposts can either be converted to cities, or attached to cities; the city can then build districts in the territory and exploit the resources. Until the territory is attached to a city or becomes one itself, outposts can be raided/destroyed without going to war. Really like this mechanic where you can skirmish for territory and defend your claims in the early game. The system also reduces the city spam of Civ games, meaning less micromanagement later on. Additionally, the game puts a limit on how many cities you can have without penalty (the limit increases with research and policies).
- Diplomacy
You have various "contracts" (different levels of trade, open borders, non-aggression etc.). Although the list isn't huge, it seems sufficient. No research or tech trading, though? Also, there's grievances that you can push (e.g. demanding territory if someone expands near you, or damages if they attack your units) or forgive (and so can the AI). Additionally there's a meter for how ok someone (and you) is to go to war with each other, and during war bringing that meter to 0 lets one side enforce their demands (with a war score system). I liked that.
- Wonders
You can use influence to call "dibs" on a wonder (one at a time) that only you can build, but you don't have to start building right away. Wonders are "joint projects": you build them in one city but other cities can contribute their production to it, speeding up the process considerably. Really liked this mechanic.
- Stability
Most districts you build in a city cost stability. Infrastructure, wonders etc. can mitigate the stability hit. There's a couple other things affecting it, but overall I thought it's a nice little system to simulate the needs of growing cities.
Neutral
- Policies/Edicts
A variant on Traditions, with various policies in several areas where you have a binary choice, bought with Influence (a currency you accrue and need for expansion etc.). These policies give empire wide bonuses and also affect a bunch of sliders, but I didn't feel the sliders affected much? You can change your picks using influence. Could do with some fleshing out, I feel.
- Culture Progression
I really love choosing your theme and focus (expansion, trade, war ...) for each era, picking a combo of (1) Empire bonus (that you keep for the rest of the game, (2) unique building that is only available in this era (but you get to keep those you build), (3) unique units (same as buildings). However, I feel it also loses some flavor. It becomes a bit weird when your Eastern neighbor is alternatively addressed as Babylonians, Romans, and English depending on which era they're in. You're starting to pay more attention to their "avatar" leader to keep track of who is who - and thus I started to pay less attention to the cultures as opposed to the bonuses they give. So it ends up feeling a bit bland. I don't want to lose the mechanic, so not sure what the solution would be - perhaps a more visible mashing of the cultures (though it may be hard to envision what a Mycenaean-Greek-Cambodian-Spanish-French culture in my case would look like).
- Combat
I'm fine with having army stacks again (size of stacks can be expanded through tech). And while I think the tactical on map combat is a nice idea, I mostly found myself auto-resolving, because I didn't find it engaging (I was the same in Endless Legend). Auto-resolve seemed mostly fine, though. Razing outposts can sometimes take a while (several turns), and so do sieges (btw. I like that you siege cities with armies and can assault them or starve them, instead of the bombardment spam of Civ 5 or 6). Overall fine. Neither great nor horrible.
- Events
Occasionally there'll be events popping up, usually giving you multiple choices on how to deal with a situation. Some can have follow up events based on your choices. Generally I like this, but it remains to be seen how many there are, and how repetitive they become over multiple playthroughs, so I put them in neutral for now.
Negative
- Tech progression
The tech tree felt very basic and not very engaging. I admit my favorite tech tree in a civ-like game in recent years was the one in Beyond Earth where you start at the center and work your way outwards through the various paths of the web and had multiple ways to the same tech. It doesn't help that there seems to be placeholder instead of flavor text when you get a new tech.
- Trade
You engage in trade by clicking a resource on the map in a foreign empire and buying it (provided your trade status with them allows it). It's serviceable, but not great. I prefer the trade routes mechanic from Civ 6.
- Districts flavor
I said that I liked district management better than in Civ 6. However, the districts themselves are a tad bland. There's some basic ones that come in flavors of "food", "production", and "science", plus a couple of others like fortresses, harbors, markets etc., but the choices, while making sense, lack flavor IMHO.
Overall I like what I see so far, and I look forward to the full release.
Thanks Syt, I have been keeping half an eye on this one and been tempted by this closed beta, so I appreciate the review. :cheers:
One thing that was concerning (and which I hope gets rebalanced) was the speed of advancing in eras vs advancing in tech. I ended up in the Industrial Era (and my policies options matched that), but even though I discovered techs every 5 or 6 turns (there was a bit of a slow down in early game where it might have been 10) I had only made it to knights, quadriremes, crossbowmen etc. ... tech progression felt fine, but I feel the era progression might need to slow down.
Quote from: Syt on June 15, 2021, 05:42:02 AM
One thing that was concerning (and which I hope gets rebalanced) was the speed of advancing in eras vs advancing in tech. I ended up in the Industrial Era (and my policies options matched that), but even though I discovered techs every 5 or 6 turns (there was a bit of a slow down in early game where it might have been 10) I had only made it to knights, quadriremes, crossbowmen etc. ... tech progression felt fine, but I feel the era progression might need to slow down.
Interesting. Civ6 had the same issue for me around tech progress vs. number of years passed. It annoyed me to no end.
I didn't comment on religion, which is probably a comment in and of itself. :P It's there, and by gaining faith you can choose tenets of faith that give bonuses. There seems to be a "faith push" like culture push? I didn't really engage much with it, tbh.
Oh, and one final comment - on the whole I liked the tone of the game. It's more reminiscent of earlier Civ titles. Civ 6 is a good game IMHO, but it's also leaning heavily into being a game with its presentation and characters, and stuff like Scots getting golf course buildings and Brazilians having soccer stadiums, plus rock bands and similar. It feels more like it's trying to be more "historic" (which of course it isn't, but it's not wearing clown shoes, either.)
I also didn't mind the lack of settlers, builders, or religious units. Like, at all. :D
Nice so for me the only question remaining then if I should grab it now to check the beta out or wait for the 1.0 release in August.
Quote from: Tamas on June 15, 2021, 05:53:18 AM
Nice so for me the only question remaining then if I should grab it now to check the beta out or wait for the 1.0 release in August.
I think you can get access to the current beta by linking your Games2Gether account with Twitch:
https://dotesports.com/general/news/how-to-get-humankind-beta-access-through-twitch-drops
Also, take my comments with a grain of salt. I play these games quite casually. Maybe check comments from people who play these more hardcore than I do :P
Any good LPs of the latest build? I used to watch Marbozir when it came to Civ-related content, but he's been running on fumes for years now.
PotatoMcWhiskey has uploaded his stream: https://youtu.be/zPNniLsIWHM
I'm not familiar with his work, but scrubbing through he seems not overly annoying. :P
There's also Zakh who mostly plays builder/strategy games. https://youtu.be/16wLoz9Pgak
Quill18 is uploading his stream series, but he chops it up into less than half hour episodes and has only 2 of them up so far.
I've only seen some stuff from Marbozir. He seemed kind of annoying when he was doing some collaboration with Quill18 and he really annoyed me when he was playing Talisman with a few other YouTubers I was following at the time and when he had some bad dice rolls (in a heavily dice roll reliant game) he just kept whining and moaning and basically wanted to quit with the others talking to him to stay in because Talisman is unpredictable and things can always change. Didn't help that he was super gloating when he was ahead.
You can watch Quill18's stream on Twitch VOD. But I don't find his Humankind play to be compelling. He doesn't know enough about the game yet to explain what he's doing.
That's every Quill18 stream, it seems.
:lol:
Quote from: Habbaku on June 16, 2021, 08:08:56 AM
That's every Quill18 stream, it seems.
I was going to say that. :mad:
Quote from: Grey Fox on June 16, 2021, 06:06:03 AM
You can watch Quill18's stream on Twitch VOD. But I don't find his Humankind play to be compelling. He doesn't know enough about the game yet to explain what he's doing.
It's an accurate depiction of a new player playing the game then?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on June 17, 2021, 04:35:13 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on June 16, 2021, 06:06:03 AM
You can watch Quill18's stream on Twitch VOD. But I don't find his Humankind play to be compelling. He doesn't know enough about the game yet to explain what he's doing.
It's an accurate depiction of a new player playing the game then?
Fair point, but also with more complex games like this it is entirely possible for a new player to miss some mechanic or interesting detail which give a fuller picture and appreciation of the game - I kinda' like Quill18 but "play like a new player" is of little value to me - after all I can just buy on Steam and refund within two hours. I most like Youtube reviews where I can gain easy insight into things a cursory look would miss.
That pacing of era / technology / culture still needs work seems the biggest issue from this thread and some early reviews. Let's hope they fix that. Big issue in Civ VI for me until I got a pacing mod.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on June 17, 2021, 04:35:13 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on June 16, 2021, 06:06:03 AM
You can watch Quill18's stream on Twitch VOD. But I don't find his Humankind play to be compelling. He doesn't know enough about the game yet to explain what he's doing.
It's an accurate depiction of a new player playing the game then?
Can be but it's also hard to follow.
My recollection of Quill18 style is that when he starts the Civ 6 game, he tries to figure out for 18 minutes how to move the settler, and all the while commentating on his current insights of how to move a settler. Once he figures it out, he spends the next 13 minutes figuring out how to move a warrior, likewise commentating throughout on what he's figuring out. By the end of the third episode you give up on seeing the second turn.
:yes:
He does that and then he stops & just YOLOs for awhile.
Quote from: Grey Fox on June 17, 2021, 08:45:38 AM
He does that and then he stops & just YOLOs for awhile.
I admit I prefer that to the relentless of min/maxing of other let's players.
Quill also does a lot of "I really need to produce some builders"
Eight turns later. "I really need to produce some builders."
16 turns later: "I thought I had some builders."
I like many a true nerd. He's got a cool sense of humour.
I don't begrudge Quill's success, and it seems pretty clear he's an engaging, friendly guy. He's just the exact opposite type of player I want to watch play new games. :D
Btw, the full cultures list:
Neolithic Era
Nomadic Tribe
Ancient Era
Assyrians – Expansionist
Babylonians – Scientist
Egyptians – Builder
Harappens – Agrarian
Hittites – Militarist
Mycenaeans – Militarist
Nubians – Merchant
Olmecs – Aesthete
Phoenicians – Merchant
Zhou – Aesthete
Classical Era
Achaemenid Persians – Expansionist
Aksumites – Merchant
Carthaginians -Merchant
Celts – Agrarian
Goths – Militarist
Greeks – Scientist
Huns – Militarist
Mauryans – Aesthete
Maya – Builder
Romans – Expansionist
Medieval Era
Aztecs – Militarist
Byzantines – Merchant
English – Agrarian
Franks – Aesthete
Ghanaians – Merchant
Khmer – Builder
Mongols – Militarist
Norsemen – Militarist
Teutons – Expansionist
Umayyads – Scientist
Early Modern Era
Dutch – Merchant
Edo Japanese – Aesthete
Haudenosaunee – Agrarian
Joseon – Scientist
Ming – Aesthete
Mughals – Builder
Ottomans – Expansionist
Poles – Militarist
Spanish – Expansionist
Venetians – Merchant
Industrial Era
Austro-Hungarians – Aesthete
British – Expansionist
French – Scientist
Germans – Militarist
Italians – Aesthete
Mexicans – Agrarian
Persians – Builder
Russians – Expansionist
Siamese – Builder
Zulu – Militarist
Contemporary Era
Americans - Expansionist
Australians - Builder
Brazilians - Agrarian
Chinese - Merchant
Egyptians - Aesthete
Indians - Aesthete
Japanese - Scientist
Soviets - Expansionist
Swedes - Scientist
Turks - Agrarian
Quote from: Syt on June 17, 2021, 08:55:32 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on June 17, 2021, 08:45:38 AM
He does that and then he stops & just YOLOs for awhile.
I admit I prefer that to the relentless of min/maxing of other let's players.
I don't like min/maxing either. I unsubscribed from Taueror a while ago, because all these videos with Order 66 got old really fast, and that seemed to be the only tool in his toolbox. Okay, I get it, you can break the game with a stupid trick, it might be interested to see once, but it's not interesting to watch time and again. I actually want to see someone enjoy playing a game the way it was intended, and parking your troops in the country so that they instantly occupy it the moment the war is declared is not it.
I guess the sweet spot is someone who really tries to play the game the way it's meant to be played, but can also show you how to play it better than you can figure out on your own.
Swedes are scientists? The science of bork?
So do you switch cultures each era?
Quote from: Josephus on June 17, 2021, 08:32:26 PM
So do you switch cultures each era?
Yeah, that is the main claim to fame for the game.
Each epoch you choose a new culture. You could stay with the same one, at least in an earlier beta version, but I am not sure why you would want to.
So Youtubers got the release version, except as I understand the modern era is disabled for them. Which seems a huge warning sign.
Luckily it'll be on Gamepass from day one.
Quote from: Tamas on August 15, 2021, 02:16:23 PM
So Youtubers got the release version, except as I understand the modern era is disabled for them. Which seems a huge warning sign.
Luckily it'll be on Gamepass from day one.
I haven't seen the whole thing, but I thought Quill said in his game that he's got the full retail version.
This guy is saying at the start that modern era and some other stuff are locked
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27GmRfE5dzY&t=822s
Quote from: Tamas on August 15, 2021, 02:52:29 PM
This guy is saying at the start that modern era and some other stuff are locked
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27GmRfE5dzY&t=822s
I think it's just under embargo, not locked.
https://youtu.be/tUKSogj_3zA?t=48
That's still an admission that the late game is untested, though. Or, even worse, tested, but couldn't be made to work.
This game sounds great on paper, but I have to say, I just found every LP to be a bore to sit through. Something about it just doesn't engage me at all, at least not when watching it.
Quote from: DGuller on August 16, 2021, 07:18:26 AM
This game sounds great on paper, but I have to say, I just found every LP to be a bore to sit through. Something about it just doesn't engage me at all, at least not when watching it.
I'll definitely give it a try (once I am back from holiday) but yeah Endless Legend I desperately wanted to like but couldn't. I hope this won't be the same.
Quote from: Tamas on August 16, 2021, 02:53:46 AM
That's still an admission that the late game is untested, though. Or, even worse, tested, but couldn't be made to work.
Not sure that follows at all. The developer has a youtube video showing how it works.
Nate Crowley on RPS:
QuoteHumankind isn't perfect, even discounting my personal feelings about the relative efficacy and fun potential of different playstyles. There were a lot of small but weird bugs in the review build: notifications informing me that the Olmecs had advanced to the Ancient Era no less than five times; the narrator expressing his shock at my building five, fifteen, and then thirty farming quarters on consecutive turns, when I had done no such thing; a boat panicking when set to auto-explore.
There was nothing game-breaking in there, but there were a few too many noodles out of the soup for a game so highly polished in other regards. It did lead me to wonder how many other cracks were hidden below the waterline of this weird, mixed metaphor noodle boat.
Beyond that sort of thing, my only real problem with Humankind is the issue I alluded to right at the start: that despite really liking it, I'm not 100% sure of what it is. It has set out to prove itself as a historical 4X that is emphatically not a Civ clone, and it has succeeded. But in bending itself around the monolithic bulk of Big Sid's baby, it has grown into a strange shape. There's just a lot going on, is the best way I can put it. At times, this makes for an extremely rich strategic play. At other times, it makes for an experience verging on information overload.
Indeed, and especially in the later stages of a game, Humankind can feel more like a puzzle game than a 4X, with the business of hexes and multipliers abstracting it from its central theme of humanity. Still, if the worst things I can find to say about Humankind are that it sometimes makes me think too much, and that I need to play it more, it's hardly a bloody disaster, is it? Go make yourself some harbours, and tell the Olmecs I said hello. If they ever make it out of their Ancient Era time loop and invent writing, that is.
PC Gamer's Frazer Brown says it's a solid 4X that lacks personality and gives it 71%.
QuoteEven with more enthusiastic opponents, the momentum falters in the endgame as Humankind runs out of new tricks. It gets familiar late additions like the space race, nukes and pollution, but all of them are disappointingly perfunctory. I sped to the end of the very traditional tech tree in my first game, and acquiring all of humanity's knowledge only left me hollow. Perhaps there's a valuable lesson in there, but I'd rather have more neat things to do with fancy technology. There are only so many times the numbers can grow before you crave something a bit more substantial.
Old World serves as an interesting comparison. Like Humankind, Civ's influence is everywhere, but while that gave Old World a starting point, where it ended up was a lot more unusual. It found a new place to focus on—people—and all sorts of surprising crises and obstacles as a result, like being murdered by your nephew. While Humankind has reconsidered and reconfigured Civ's features, it's been more reserved. Being able to adopt new cultures and nurture continent-sized cities is certainly novel, but it isn't transformative. It could probably do with being 20% weirder, I reckon. I've done the maths. And I've had lots of practice, given Humankind's aforementioned love of big numbers.
The End Turn button still beckons, however, and Memphis needs more oil for its battleships. I also need to try out a lethal militant build I've been considering, in the hopes of quickly throwing the world into an apocalyptic war. Humankind has still spawned some great ideas that I'm not done with, and can't wait to see imitated and iterated. But now that Amplitude has made its Civilization, I really hope it goes back to making Alpha Centauris.
Not sure if I want to pull the trigger on this. Is it a blander Civ-lite or an unpolished gem that needs a year of bug fixes and expensive DLC?
It's almost looking like just a mod of Endless Legend in a "real-world" setting.
It is the soul of a game that intrigues me. If it isn't there, I won't play it much. The worst possible thing is to make a MOO3 and it looks great but has no "there" there.
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on August 17, 2021, 10:15:01 AM
Not sure if I want to pull the trigger on this. Is it a blander Civ-lite or an unpolished gem that needs a year of bug fixes and expensive DLC?
I have played the Beta and now a couple of hours of the full game. It is neither of those things. But it also may not be everyone's favourite game. It is more complex than CIV and imo more polished than CIV even after all its DLCs. But those are also its weaknesses for people just looking for a basic CIV like experience.
It is available to download and play on Game Pass if you have that.
I've tooled around a bit for an hour. You start off with a unit of tribesmen in the Neolithic era hunting mammoths and foraging for food :lol: I kinda like that a lot, actually.
In the Neolithic you have to earn points by hunting and exploring the world to advance into the Ancient era. Once there you can choose your first culture. It happens pretty quickly.
In the Neolithic you also can build an outpost which claims a territory for you. I assume it eventually upgrades into a city as it grows.
Pretty neat so far. Definitely not a civ clone.
yeah, I been playing with it for a couple hours.
I'm learning my way around, trying to figure it out. It does seem complex. I like complex, as long as I can figure it out. Will have to watch a lot of youtube
Quote from: PDH on August 17, 2021, 11:05:26 AM
It is the soul of a game that intrigues me.
It's Amplitude Studios. No such thing. All the critics this game has can be laid at all their games since the first.
Quote from: Josephus on August 17, 2021, 04:35:35 PM
yeah, I been playing with it for a couple hours.
I'm learning my way around, trying to figure it out. It does seem complex. I like complex, as long as I can figure it out. Will have to watch a lot of youtube
I don't think so. I find it pretty intuitive. The challenge is going to be using all the tools available to get the fame you crave :D
And I think that is situational rather than a cookie cutter - hard to put into a how to video.
I bought it. Haven't been able to play yet.
One of the big differences with Civ is the way civilizations are chosen. There is the bit about choosing every era, but that is just one aspect of the decision. The other big decision is when to make the jump. Once you collect enough stars (achievements) to make the jump up, you still have to decide if you do it or not. Sometimes it is better to wait because you are just about to finish off more achievements and collect the fame for those accomplishments. If you jump up you lose that fame. But if you don't jump up now someone else might take the civilization you wanted in the next era.
This is I think one of the big differences. When playing Civ, you know exactly what your strategy is going to be when you pick you civilization. But with Humankind, because you first have to make it to the era where you get to pick, the civilization you wanted may already be taken, so you need to adapt. And adapt throughout the game. There really is no cookie cutter strategy here.
I've played five hours so far and am enjoying it. Still learning some of the mechanics. I went to war once and had no idea what I was doing.
Quote from: Josephus on August 19, 2021, 06:07:33 AM
I've played five hours so far and am enjoying it. Still learning some of the mechanics. I went to war once and had no idea what I was doing.
In Afghanistan?
:pinch: Too soon.
Brb evolving my Persian Afghanistan into Greco-Bactrian Kingdom
Quote from: The Brain on August 19, 2021, 06:20:54 AM
Quote from: Josephus on August 19, 2021, 06:07:33 AM
I've played five hours so far and am enjoying it. Still learning some of the mechanics. I went to war once and had no idea what I was doing.
In Afghanistan?
:lmfao:
After getting gangbanged by 3 surrounding empires on a hard difficulty in my first game learning how to play I restarted on lower difficulty (Metropolis, the middle difficulty level) and happened to start in a much more pleasant starting area. Took Olmecs as starting culture and used the extra influence to claim territories throughout the lower half of the continent, which was largely uninhabited except by me. A little later, because I had a ton of influence, I assimilated and absorbed an independent nation. Ran into the Huns soon after.
The Huns started as some other culture, I don't remember what, but had already vassalized another empire, the Achaemenid Persians, near them in the upper half of the continent. Their cultural unit, the Hunnic Hordes, easily pwned a couple of my smaller armies I had sent north to skirmish with. Then the Huns captured an independent nation situated to my immediate west and it was panic stations at the disco for me.
In the meantime I also entered the Classical era, where I chose the Romans. Their cultural traits allows army stacks to have +1 unit in each stack (default is 4, so 5 per stack) and lowers army upkeep. So as the Romans I can make and maintain bigger armies, which I figured was my only hope against the Hunnic Hordes traipsing across the continent.
I forcibly conscripted a ton of Spearmen and other units (units also cost population as well as gold) in a hurry and sent them all west where the Huns and their newly captured city lay in waiting. I had a forward base hugging the central continental mountain range which served as a jumping off point for my forces. Soon after the Huns attacked and our armies sprawled out across the plains overlooked by my mountain redoubts.
The Huns had two full stacks of their Hunnic archers but were heavily outnumbered by my Spearmen, warriors, and mercenaries bought from friendly independent nations nearby. Eventually my numbers just overwhelmed them and their entire army was destroyed with the loss of only an archer and a scout. I assaulted the city walls soon after.
Some turns later the Huns came back with more horde units but the result played out largely the same: A huge battle with vast does arrayed out on a vast plain where my numbers just swallowed up the Huns.
Later I took one of their outposts for it's strategic resources before accepting their pleas for peace. It's good to be the Olmec-Romans.
Huns are killing me. Even after they switched to being Aztecs. And then Poles.
That's kind of the weird thing in this game. I'm at war with the Huns one turn, the Aztecs another.
I wish they would at least add the name of the opponent somewhere, so you have more of a fixed point of reference.
They should let the player name the empires every game.
I've only played a couple hours so far. Still on my first game, and getting my butt kicked as Mayans by the Huns. I have no access to copper, but I will have iron in a few turns. This is on second lowest difficulty, btw. :lol:
I'm mostly struggling to focus enough to learn the game which is a bit frustrating. I will keep plinking away at it, though.
Quote from: FunkMonk on August 20, 2021, 08:24:55 AM
They should let the player name the empires every game.
You can identify the AI opponent by the colour of their banner and also their Avatar. You can go into the AI settings to select which of the avatars you want to play against, they all have different attributes. Their current civilization, as you pointed out, is not a very meaningful way of identifying them.
Quote from: Syt on August 20, 2021, 12:54:43 PM
I've only played a couple hours so far. Still on my first game, and getting my butt kicked as Mayans by the Huns. I have no access to copper, but I will have iron in a few turns. This is on second lowest difficulty, btw. :lol:
I'm mostly struggling to focus enough to learn the game which is a bit frustrating. I will keep plinking away at it, though.
Try using the diplomacy part of the game a bit more, there are a lot of ways to deal with a neighbour other than fighting with them, even in the early game - another of the big differences with the CIV franchise where you really want to try to take out the first neighouring civ asap. Not so much in this game.
Well, the Huns have/had no grievances against me, and vice versa. We had full trade going and a non-aggression treaty, but they renounced them all and attacked me. The only option to resolve the war is for me to surrender. White Peace is not an option, because no grievances according to the tool tip.
Yeah the Huns can be real pricks in this game. The only way to deal with them is to beat their asses in a war. After you do that they get all sulky :lol:
The Kaiser is such a loser.
Some things I have learned about the first three ages:
1) it is better to stay in the first era until you have gathered 10 curiosities. Once you get that you will get to choose a buff that you carry for the rest of the game.
2) The excess units you create during the first era can be disbanded into your first city in order to increase the population. You can do that with all units but with the starting units it is a free pop boost.
3) the trading system is completely different from CIV, you are not trading the good itself but access to the extractor. All nations can gain access to the same extractor site - for a price.
4) use your early money to buy trade routes for the luxury and strategic goods you need - ie don't use that money to speed production. The buffs you gets from purchasing trade routes for goods you do not produce yourself are better.
5) Build your outposts with 3 and 4 in mind. It is better to be the owner of the goods that everyone wants forcing them to trade for them. That reduces their aggression toward you. If you have a trade imbalance in their favour their aggression goes up - The AI sees you are dependent and will exact a demand for that sort of one side access.
6) Be very careful about who you pick fights with. buying an early non aggression pact with a militarily inclined close neighbour can save you a lot of grief - follow it up with trading to allow them to purchase trade routes with you and your worst nightmare just became your best protector. you can then take on others on the continent with a bit more confidence - or just befriend them all and expand to other islands and continents that might still be empty.
7) try to develop two cities before building more outposts - that might not be possible since it might take some searching to find a viable spot for the second city. But if you can do it immediately that will help a lot.
Quote from: crazy canuck on August 21, 2021, 02:29:34 PM
Some things I have learned about the first three ages:
1) it is better to stay in the first era until you have gathered 10 curiosities. Once you get that you will get to choose a buff that you carry for the rest of the game.
2) The excess units you create during the first era can be disbanded into your first city in order to increase the population. You can do that with all units but with the starting units it is a free pop boost.
3) the trading system is completely different from CIV, you are not trading the good itself but access to the extractor. All nations can gain access to the same extractor site - for a price.
4) use your early money to buy trade routes for the luxury and strategic goods you need - ie don't use that money to speed production. The buffs you gets from purchasing trade routes for goods you do not produce yourself are better.
5) Build your outposts with 3 and 4 in mind. It is better to be the owner of the goods that everyone wants forcing them to trade for them. That reduces their aggression toward you. If you have a trade imbalance in their favour their aggression goes up - The AI sees you are dependent and will exact a demand for that sort of one side access.
6) Be very careful about who you pick fights with. buying an early non aggression pact with a militarily inclined close neighbour can save you a lot of grief - follow it up with trading to allow them to purchase trade routes with you and your worst nightmare just became your best protector. you can then take on others on the continent with a bit more confidence - or just befriend them all and expand to other islands and continents that might still be empty.
7) try to develop two cities before building more outposts - that might not be possible since it might take some searching to find a viable spot for the second city. But if you can do it immediately that will help a lot.
Yeah that all sounds good.
RE: Number seven though. My strategy in the first two games I've played has been to develop two cities quickly, but I'm noticing that the AI grabs land quickly and I get boxed in. I'm thinking for my next game to just plop outposts everywhere I can and then start making cities and annexing the outposts.
I'm also having a problem with culture...seems like my neighbours are always effecting the culture on my cities. I'm not sure what happens there, but I need to prevent it.
And no idea what I'm doing with faith. In fact, I'm ignoring that for now.
WASD movement is so slow. Really dampers my enjoyment of the map.
So I'm at turn 200 or so and one Civ reached the top culture, I'm still at Culture two :lol:
I found in both my games there's always one Civ that dominates.
Quote from: Josephus on August 21, 2021, 05:25:22 PM
RE: Number seven though. My strategy in the first two games I've played has been to develop two cities quickly, but I'm noticing that the AI grabs land quickly and I get boxed in. I'm thinking for my next game to just plop outposts everywhere I can and then start making cities and annexing the outposts.
I'm also having a problem with culture...seems like my neighbours are always effecting the culture on my cities. I'm not sure what happens there, but I need to prevent it.
And no idea what I'm doing with faith. In fact, I'm ignoring that for now.
I tried the strategy of grabbing all the outposts I could in my first game. What I learned is how well balanced the game is. If you go with the land rush option there is a large premium and significant opportunity costs. First, the premium side - the cost of establishing an outpost is based on the number of territories between the outpost and one of your cities, and the total number of territories you control. The cost of establishing an outpost quickly gets close the the cost of establishing that second city. Now for the real kicker - the opportunity cost. Cities are where you generate the culture (stars) that are used to purchase the society choices (and their passive bonuses), the fame you get for generating culture, and the cost of putting an outpost on new territories/creating new cities.
With only one city I found I was falling way behind cultural generation and because I was spending the few points I was generating on outposts, I could not expand my capital or purchase the society choices. It was a disaster.
The other problem with land rushing is when you build an outpost next to another players territory, they get a claim on you. Same works the other way. So there is an additional cost benefit analysis - is it going to be worth pissing off the militaristic AI player just to stake a claim an a territory adjacent to them? If it has a bunch of resources, maybe. If not, likely not.
The important thing to realize is you are always going to get boxed in. This in not CIV where you need to spam cities. Nor do you need to have contiguous territories. Rather you need to have well placed cities that give you control over luxury and strategic nodes. Your capital is going to be your largest city because it gets the stability bonus and each attached territory is a stability hit. Your other cities are not going to have many territories attached - unless you get lucky and get natural wonders in their boundaries, allowing you to attach more before you need to worry about the stability hit.
And don't forget about sea exploration - I just had a great game where I found a new continent before the others. It had hostile independent cities but also some land where I could create a two new three territory cities before taking on the independents.
Lastly, also don't forget about the tech you will develop that lets new cities have all of the improvements of the proceeding tech ages. That is huge - so save the development of some cities until you reach that tech.
I love how well balanced this game is. There is not the kind of snowballing that occurs in CIV, there are always a number of factors to balance.
Quote from: Josephus on August 21, 2021, 08:59:42 PM
So I'm at turn 200 or so and one Civ reached the top culture, I'm still at Culture two :lol:
I found in both my games there's always one Civ that dominates.
Don't worry too much about where you are in relation to AI players in the eras. I found the AI speeds through the eras as quickly as possible. But that means it is also forgoing fame that it might have earned if it stayed a bit longer before moving up. Also there is a catchup mechanism that gives all other players stars based on the number of players in advance eras. In the game I just won I was always a bit behind the leading two AI players but once I got to the last era I easily passed them in fame because I had spent some time getting the reasonably attainable extra fame. Once again it is all about trade offs. You only have 300 turns so you can't wait to get every star in every era. But trying if you are close to getting more fame it is better to delay jumping up in order to collect the fame from that era. The other thing to think about is building all the civ specific buildings - in each territory of each city you have before jumping up. Each of those gives cultural boosts along with all the other bonuses.
Quote from: Grey Fox on August 21, 2021, 06:12:49 PM
WASD movement is so slow. Really dampers my enjoyment of the map.
You can change the speed.
Quote from: crazy canuck on August 22, 2021, 10:13:03 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on August 21, 2021, 06:12:49 PM
WASD movement is so slow. Really dampers my enjoyment of the map.
You can change the speed.
No. It changes mouse edging speed not the WASD movement.
Quote from: crazy canuck on August 22, 2021, 10:12:37 AM
The important thing to realize is you are always going to get boxed in. This in not CIV where you need to spam cities. Nor do you need to have contiguous territories. Rather you need to have well placed cities that give you control over luxury and strategic nodes. Your capital is going to be your largest city because it gets the stability bonus and each attached territory is a stability hit. Your other cities are not going to have many territories attached - unless you get lucky and get natural wonders in their boundaries, allowing you to attach more before you need to worry about the stability hit.
Thanks.
So, it's OK to build cities that are not connected to my main city? I never build that way, in any game. Seems very strange to do that.
I haven't tried this game yet but it's top of the list for me to get next. From the comments here and what I've read it's significantly different from Civ which is obvious, and I'm glad of that so as it should be a refreshing change of pace.
Quote from: Grey Fox on August 22, 2021, 12:46:27 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on August 22, 2021, 10:13:03 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on August 21, 2021, 06:12:49 PM
WASD movement is so slow. Really dampers my enjoyment of the map.
You can change the speed.
No. It changes mouse edging speed not the WASD movement.
I don't think you should edge your mouse. :ph34r:
But seriously, if you press and hold the middle mouse button, you can move the map by moving the mouse. It's noticeably faster than with edge scrolling.
For my current, third, game, I've moved down a difficulty level to Town from the third level. A lot easier (to the point it's getting dull now). No one attacks me and I'm snowballing heavily by mid game. Still it's good to learn mechanics and advance through the ages. Huge difference though between this and the third difficulty level.
Quote from: Solmyr on August 23, 2021, 04:30:49 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on August 22, 2021, 12:46:27 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on August 22, 2021, 10:13:03 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on August 21, 2021, 06:12:49 PM
WASD movement is so slow. Really dampers my enjoyment of the map.
You can change the speed.
No. It changes mouse edging speed not the WASD movement.
I don't think you should edge your mouse. :ph34r:
But seriously, if you press and hold the middle mouse button, you can move the map by moving the mouse. It's noticeably faster than with edge scrolling.
I just use the left mouse button, click - hold - move the mouse curser to where I want to go. Quick and easy.
I moved the difficulty to 4th (Nation) for my second game. Early game was a bit tough especially since I usually fail to build enough military in these games, but later on I still steamrolled the AI and was easily in the top spot on science. Funnily enough, after winning that game I also got the achievement for winning the game on highest difficulty.
I went construction civs all the way except the last which went science in the last play through. I won the game before turn 150. The civs might need to be balanced out a bit better. With the construction civs you never have to worry about stability because you get a +10 stability buff with each section you build.
I am going to try to go full warfare and see what happens. I have yet to declare a war.
Quote from: crazy canuck on August 25, 2021, 11:48:23 AM
I went construction civs all the way except the last which went science in the last play through. I won the game before turn 150. The civs might need to be balanced out a bit better. With the construction civs you never have to worry about stability because you get a +10 stability buff with each section you build.
I am going to try to go full warfare and see what happens. I have yet to declare a war.
What level you playing at?
Quote from: Josephus on August 26, 2021, 06:39:35 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on August 25, 2021, 11:48:23 AM
I went construction civs all the way except the last which went science in the last play through. I won the game before turn 150. The civs might need to be balanced out a bit better. With the construction civs you never have to worry about stability because you get a +10 stability buff with each section you build.
I am going to try to go full warfare and see what happens. I have yet to declare a war.
What level you playing at?
Can't remember the name of it - the third level up. Also, I exaggerated, when I went to start my military game I saw I did not win until turn 190 in the last game.
Bought it, tried it, refunded it.
I felt zero connection to my civ or my neighbours. The whole premise of the civ-jumping did not do it for me, quite the opposite. Oh well.
That's kinda been my hesitation...the concept of doing something like going on some kind of civilization path like Assyrian->Roman->Hapsburg->American just seems awkward to me.
I think I'd prefer just more generic/unnamed "civilizations" concepts/toolsets if you will, instead.
I don't get the idea of civ-jumping either. I know it's a central idea to the concept of the game, but it just feels bizarre. Judging by others' comments, I'm getting a vibe that this game is as sterile as Beyond Earth.
Quote from: Tonitrus on August 27, 2021, 08:57:35 AM
That's kinda been my hesitation...the concept of doing something like going on some kind of civilization path like Assyrian->Roman->Hapsburg->American just seems awkward to me.
I think I'd prefer just more generic/unnamed "civilizations" concepts/toolsets if you will, instead.
The nature of your civilization works very differently than in Civ. In that game the thing with the greatest influence is the civ you choose to play - from that the type of game you will pay is determined. Human kind is very different. I think that is where the disconnect is - if people think they are going to play a Civ clone they will be disappointed. The character and abilities of each civilization is developed over time based on a large range of factors including: how you interact with your neighbours (from which you will generate various buffs or detriments); which civic choices you make and the choices available are also determined by all the other choices made in the game; how you approach religion; and I would put last - the specific Civs you choose in each era. Those are actually the least meaningful because they only give you one particular attribute which you carry through time.
@ DGuller, sterile? Anything but - rather there is so much going on that is different from Civ that I think a lot of players expecting to play this like Civ miss a lot of the mechanics.
Played a bit, but did not really "get it" yet. Some mechanics make a lot of sense, others are less clear to me.
Civ-hopping sounds like a dealbreaker to me. It might be awesome, but it's not for me.
Hypothetical for those who don't like the idea of switching civilizations each era: imagine you were still picking the same bonuses, special buildings, units each era, but they're not named for a civilization/country, just something generic. Would that work for you?
Quote from: Syt on August 27, 2021, 02:10:22 PM
Hypothetical for those who don't like the idea of switching civilizations each era: imagine you were still picking the same bonuses, special buildings, units each era, but they're not named for a civilization/country, just something generic. Would that work for you?
I don't know enough about the game to answer.
Quote from: Syt on August 27, 2021, 02:10:22 PM
Hypothetical for those who don't like the idea of switching civilizations each era: imagine you were still picking the same bonuses, special buildings, units each era, but they're not named for a civilization/country, just something generic. Would that work for you?
For me it might...but I know that is really just superficial flavor, as I know it would just become something like Egypt = Monument Builders / Assyrians = Raiders, etc.
And I could easily see such a thing being blasted as "sterile" as well.
I dunno...I never got Civ 6, and had soured on 5 pretty quickly as well, but more so for the overall game mechanics...and maybe just overall Civ-fatigue (I was huge on Civ 1/2/3/4 back the day).
From looking at the playthroughs though, I think it is the combat system that bothers me more (it looks like they just kept EL's combat system).
I don't care for Civ's either...I think how combat is dealt with in Civ and games like these needs a serious re-look.
The thing I like least about Humankind is how they deal with religion. It might feel a bit more developed if I go with the religious civics rather than all the science ones. But it really seems like an add on to get more buffs rather than something with meaningful decisions. I don't mind the combat. Have reserves, artillery firing from off map and geographic features influencing outcomes is not bad, but I have not fought many battles, and non in the last couple of eras.
I agree that civ hopping is weird. Particularly as it relates to the other players in the game. I have no idea who my friends are because they keep changing their name :D
Turn 267 and came across a game ending bug. :(
Game wants me to pick a religious tenet but there aren't any left, so it won't let me proceed.
I'm mixed with this game. Like some things, don't like other things.
I'm not convinced with wars and how they're settled. Seems like no matter how small your grievance, wars are total war...you have to whittle your enemy down to zero support. and I ran into another strange bug where I defeated and made peace with an enemy civ, but his allies kept insisting I surrender to that civ, even after I peaced out.
Quote from: Josephus on August 27, 2021, 04:46:22 PM
I agree that civ hopping is weird. Particularly as it relates to the other players in the game. I have no idea who my friends are because they keep changing their name :D
Turn 267 and came across a game ending bug. :(
Game wants me to pick a religious tenet but there aren't any left, so it won't let me proceed.
I'm mixed with this game. Like some things, don't like other things.
I'm not convinced with wars and how they're settled. Seems like no matter how small your grievance, wars are total war...you have to whittle your enemy down to zero support. and I ran into another strange bug where I defeated and made peace with an enemy civ, but his allies kept insisting I surrender to that civ, even after I peaced out.
There is a setting that removes the prompt from the game to do stuff. See if that works.
You can also keep the same civ over all eras, if you want. There's even an achievement for it. It will lack modern unique units, but otherwise should do fine.
Quote from: crazy canuck on August 27, 2021, 05:08:12 PM
Quote from: Josephus on August 27, 2021, 04:46:22 PM
I agree that civ hopping is weird. Particularly as it relates to the other players in the game. I have no idea who my friends are because they keep changing their name :D
Turn 267 and came across a game ending bug. :(
Game wants me to pick a religious tenet but there aren't any left, so it won't let me proceed.
I'm mixed with this game. Like some things, don't like other things.
I'm not convinced with wars and how they're settled. Seems like no matter how small your grievance, wars are total war...you have to whittle your enemy down to zero support. and I ran into another strange bug where I defeated and made peace with an enemy civ, but his allies kept insisting I surrender to that civ, even after I peaced out.
There is a setting that removes the prompt from the game to do stuff. See if that works.
Nah....didn't work...oh well....time for a new game.
I like how changing Civ means you can change your objectives of that era.
Assyrian for a fast early game expansion stealing outposts. Then Greece for a science oriented consolidation.
Quote from: Josephus on August 27, 2021, 04:46:22 PM
Turn 267 and came across a game ending bug. :(
Game wants me to pick a religious tenet but there aren't any left, so it won't let me proceed.
They released a new patch today; according to patch notes this should be fixed.
I played about hundred rounds now. Quite a few interesting mechanics, but not sure if the game has this Civ addiction factor for me.
Exploration is good in that you can explore for a long time and find those curiosities. However, it's not engaging as I auto-scoutand just click away the pop up at each turn start.
It is not always obvious to me why a given tile has the yields it has, but with the later big boni it seems inconsequential anyway.
Building stuff is OK, but looks to that as usual production is king and all other resources are derived from that. Which makes me favor builders.
The pacing seems off: I just entered the early modern era as the Venetians in 100 AD.
Quote from: Zanza on August 29, 2021, 05:39:09 AM
The pacing seems off: I just entered the early modern era as the Venetians in 100 AD.
You went Atheist?
Quote from: Syt on August 28, 2021, 02:06:44 PM
Quote from: Josephus on August 27, 2021, 04:46:22 PM
Turn 267 and came across a game ending bug. :(
Game wants me to pick a religious tenet but there aren't any left, so it won't let me proceed.
They released a new patch today; according to patch notes this should be fixed.
:cheers:
Haven't been this infatuated with a game in a long while. Easily best Civ-like game since Civ4.
It was nice that I had a game on Nation and I thought I had it nailed by mid-game, having a comfortable Fame lead and a safe position. Thought I just needed to hit end turn for the rest of the game. But my empire seemed incapable of gaining Industrial+ eras stars with any sort of acceptable speed and I was left behind.
Quote from: Tamas on September 02, 2021, 04:15:40 PM
Haven't been this infatuated with a game in a long while. Easily best Civ-like game since Civ4.
It was nice that I had a game on Nation and I thought I had it nailed by mid-game, having a comfortable Fame lead and a safe position. Thought I just needed to hit end turn for the rest of the game. But my empire seemed incapable of gaining Industrial+ eras stars with any sort of acceptable speed and I was left behind.
I love it when a game draws me in like that! :)
Took me a lot of time to realise, when you get to select a new Tenet (or maybe any time you go to the religion screen) you can change the default name of your religion (XY Polyethism/Shamanism) to a historical religion name and afterwards the religious building you can build reflects that choice.
I've played about five times now. Yet to see airplanes, or tanks or any modern equipment. :(
Quote from: Josephus on September 06, 2021, 06:35:07 AM
I've played about five times now. Yet to see airplanes, or tanks or any modern equipment. :(
If you have it on Steam make sure to apply the beta patch, their generation of modern era strategic resources is bugged otherwise.
Related to this, one important aspect of the design (in some ways different to Civ6) is that more is just simply better. Of everything. So if you, like me, just ease off on building new infrastructure, you are likely to fall behind.
The big (and clever) mechanism clearly intent to offset the massive snowballing that can result from the above is Stability. Which is were I think the lack of late game testing comes into play. Stability works quite well in the first half of the game, but later one can amass so many Stability bonuses (from Districts and luxury trade goods) that it seems to become largely inconsequential in the late game, assuming the player keeps a minimum level of attention to it.
For me though it's been less a resources issues as the fact that the 300 turns are up before I get anywhere near contemporary tech.
Quote from: Josephus on September 06, 2021, 08:54:36 AM
For me though it's been less a resources issues as the fact that the 300 turns are up before I get anywhere near contemporary tech.
I am now very much settled on playing Slow (450 turns) at least. Much better pacing. On my next play I'll try the slowest setting.
I am undecided on map size and number of opponents though. Because of the "ever more of everything is always better" mechanic and the late-game neutering of Stability to counter that, it feels like the variety and challenge offered by more opponents on a bigger map is offset by there being more trade goods and just, well, everything.
I played my first couple games on larger maps, but now I'm moving to smaller maps and less civs.
I found in the larger games I always end up next to aggressive Huns and Mongols and never get far.
Less civs give me a better chance of survival.
I might try the slower pace
I completed my first game. Finished 2nd. The end sucked, with 30 turns left there was nothing to do. I couldn't gain any stars/fame without attacking other civs. Civs that were too far away to get there before their were only about 5 turns left. This game needs roads much earlier than what train stations allow.
Airports are cool tho.
Quote from: Grey Fox on September 06, 2021, 11:44:33 AM
I completed my first game. Finished 2nd. The end sucked, with 30 turns left there was nothing to do. I couldn't gain any stars/fame without attacking other civs. Civs that were too far away to get there before their were only about 5 turns left. This game needs roads much earlier than what train stations allow.
Airports are cool tho.
Airports? Fuck I suck at this game.
Quote from: Grey Fox on September 06, 2021, 11:44:33 AM
I completed my first game. Finished 2nd. The end sucked, with 30 turns left there was nothing to do. I couldn't gain any stars/fame without attacking other civs. Civs that were too far away to get there before their were only about 5 turns left. This game needs roads much earlier than what train stations allow.
Airports are cool tho.
You get roads with the Wheel invention. They are created automatically and are visible when you zoom out to the strategic view.
There's art but do they affect movement? I didn't notice.
@Jo, It was a science oriented game and I made a beeline for that tech.
Quote from: Grey Fox on September 06, 2021, 01:01:56 PM
There's art but do they affect movement? I didn't notice.
They set movement cost on the terrain to 1, apparently.
Although I realise the game would become more challenging if I just auto-resolved, I rather enjoy the tactical battles. When the AI enemy outclasses me in number or tech of units I find myself checking the terrain and aiming to seek favourable grounds for battle - changes in elevation, a river, or even forests can matter a lot.
So I just finished a small game with only two AI characters and me. Still finished second. Didn't even get to railroads.
I find there's always one CIV that does really well. It finished levelling up when I was still in Early Modern. It went war with me. I was lobbing arrows at his musketmen. I got slaughtered.
Quote from: Josephus on September 07, 2021, 09:28:18 AM
So I just finished a small game with only two AI characters and me. Still finished second. Didn't even get to railroads.
I find there's always one CIV that does really well. It finished levelling up when I was still in Early Modern. It went war with me. I was lobbing arrows at his musketmen. I got slaughtered.
Yes snowballing seems to be a problem.
One thing I am trying to experiment a bit with is optimum map size/type and number of opponents.
Each map size gives you a total size and a max number of strategic/luxury resources. What's not set (because it's customisable in the rest of the settings) is % of land. So if you go with a 80% land instead of 40% overall there'll be the same number of resources, just much more dispersed.
What I am trying right now is using a Large map meant for 8 players, but with a Large Pangea continent of 90% land, and the max (10) number of opponents.
Quote from: Josephus on September 06, 2021, 08:54:36 AM
For me though it's been less a resources issues as the fact that the 300 turns are up before I get anywhere near contemporary tech.
What kind of civs are you choosing?
Quote from: crazy canuck on September 07, 2021, 12:37:22 PM
Quote from: Josephus on September 06, 2021, 08:54:36 AM
For me though it's been less a resources issues as the fact that the 300 turns are up before I get anywhere near contemporary tech.
What kind of civs are you choosing?
I don't have any pattern. I normally base it around my goals and what's around me.
In my last two games:
Game One Game two
Ancient: Hittites. Assyrian
Classic: Maya Huns
Medieval. Ummayad Norse
Early Modern: Spain Mughal
Industrial: Italian Italian
Hittites and Assyrians are actually some of the worse ancient civs. Try Egyptians for crazy building, Zhou for science and stability, or Mycenaeans for early warfare. Or Harappans if you can beat the AI to it.
I recently got the achievement for winning against 9 AI opponents on the largest map size on Humankind difficulty. Started with Egyptians to build things up in Ancient era (their archer replacement unit is excellent too), then went on to Huns and Mongols for maximum carnage. A couple of AI were ahead of me on science, but their upgrading is very slow, so they had few up-to-date units.
I agree with Solmyr, those are some weak combinations.
You really want to avoid going military in the ancient era. They have no valuable civ attributes that carry forward through the ages - unlike the Egyptians, Babylonians and Harrapans. I am not a big fan of the Harrapans but others seem to like them a lot - especially if you are going to go Hun/Mongol in the next two ages.
The ancient era is for building the base for what you are going to do next. Going Assyrian/Huns/Norse leaves you with no synergies and you were already dead in the water before you hit Mughal - by that time it was too late and the Mughals would have nothing from the previous ages to really help them. Same for the Italians.
Your game one selections were better but you gimped yourself by going Assyrian first - you would have been playing serious catchup on tech and so the Maya would not have much to build and so that era would have been a but of a waste. Then you would have been too far behind in tech for the Ummayads to catch up.
See what happens if you dont go military at all. I think you will see the game plays very differently - and unless you go with the early Hun/Mongel zerg strategy, military civs are not necessary for fighting successful wars.
IDK guys. I was just looking at the Assyrians. If you are planning a military game, they give +1MP for all your units for all eternity, and a pretty sweet very-early game cavalry unit.
Quote from: Tamas on September 08, 2021, 02:27:02 PM
IDK guys. I was just looking at the Assyrians. If you are planning a military game, they give +1MP for all your units for all eternity, and a pretty sweet very-early game cavalry unit.
I will try it next game and report back :)
ok, just 30 turns in but I can see the potential. Having those scouts with 1 extra mp makes a difference, and the ransack bonus makes ransacking my neighbours outposts, relentlessly, makes for a decent early strategy.
Is it time for a verdict? I'm guessing that no activity in this thread for half a year means that Civ is not dead yet?
Yeah, Humankind is pretty far from killing Civ. Actually seems to be slowly dying itself.
Yes. Civ still the king.
All I remember of my 2 games is that the end seemed inevitable half-way thru & that it was boring.
Yeah...haven't played it in a while. I found I never really got to play with all the late game stuff. By the time I started to build anything modern, the game was over. No fun.
I have not tried the latest major patch. That is supposed to make the late game more meaningful. I have not played or thought of Civ since the release of Humankind and if I were to go back to this sort of game I would definitely choose Humankind over Civ.
I see they have a major new beta out (can opt in on Steam , it runs till 30th May; release sometime in June?):
QuoteHere's what you can look forward to in the beta:
Reworked Surrender System: Forcing your opponent to surrender when they reach 0 War Support is now optional, but you will take stability penalties if you press on for too long
Rebalanced War Support Modifiers: Changes in War Support now scale with losses in battle, and cultural influence over territories causes war support losses
Surplus/Deficit Stability Tooltip: The stability tooltip in the city screen will now clearly display surplus or deficit stability
Infrastructure Yield Previews: Expected yields for Infrastructures are shown at the bottom of their tooltip before construction
Disabling Pollution Effects: Gameplay effects of pollution can be turned on or off in the New Game menu (defaults to off)
Administrative Center Renovation: You can update any administrative center to your current culture with a cheap construction project
Automatic Mod Reloading: The game automatically loads the mods used in your latest save when launching
Civics Unlock Conditions: Unlock conditions are shown in the tooltip of locked Civics
Unique Wonder Effects: All natural wonders now have a unique gameplay effect
Luxury Distribution Settings: In the map settings, you can now choose how even luxury resources should be spread
Scaling AI Difficulty: Bonuses the AI gets on higher difficulty now increase throughout the game to improve the late-game challenge. Please let us know how you feel about these changes on the forum and through the Bolivar Beta AI Survey
AI Delays: If your armies have queued orders for the turn, the AI will now wait for these to be resolved before engaging them
New Sortie Rules: Defenders cannot sortie on the first turn until the attacker chooses to "maintain siege"
Content Management: You can set the frequency of DLC content (except cultures) from the Content menu, and new content is highlighted in game
On the scaling AI difficulty, they aim to make the AI less hyper-aggressive in early ages, and ramp up their bonuses over the course of play (I think Stellaris has a similar option, IIRC).
You can claim the new Para Bellum Wonder Pack on Steam for free until May 10th.