Analysis - The Beauty of Humankind's Expansion and Exploitation System

[Elhoim]

First of all, thanks to the devs for allowing me to participate in the OpenDev. It's been a very enjoyable experience, and I hope you are able to make a better game thanks to it. I've played 20 hours of the scenario, trying different things, and these two came across as the biggest, more revolutionary feature Humankind has.

Expansion

Expansion in HK takes form in a 3 layer system:

- Outpost.
- Attached to a city.
- City.

Outpost is the first step in controlling a territory. It costs a bit of gold to set-up, increasing for each you build. You can use them to extract resources, but they do not generate yields.

You can then either create a city from them, or attach to an existing one. Attaching to an existing one is cheaper, but comes with a stability hit, and costs more for each one you attach. If you build a city, it's more expensive, and if you don't attach an administrator, the city gives lower yields and can't produce units.

This creates a very interesting "counter-weights" system in which territory grabbing is encouraged, and development can take different paths. There's a balanced path in which you have cities up to the administrator count, and balance with stability the territories attached to them. You can try a One City Challenge, in which you assign all territories to a single, uber city with lots of yields, but need to focus a lot on stability and would only have one point of unit production. Or even have a city in each territory, ICS style, which will be extremely stable, but not very productive due to the lack of administrators and you need to build infrastructure in each of them. Or any path in between.

The beauty here is that each path has benefits and most importantly, costs. This, by design, is excellent as there's no single, benefits only paths.

Exploitation

At first I went placing districts right next to each other, trying to get synergies. And it was kinda lackluster, as without infrastructure (the non-district buildings) I was given a pittance. Until I realized that creating "hubs" outside your city, either by attaching outposts or building a quarter next to a castle/harbor/resource extractor gives you a lot more with the same investment and creates this extremely natural civilization development in which hubs are created around very profitable areas. Which you can later support with infrastructure, and once the easily profitable areas are exploited, then you turn to adding more quarters and synergy.

You can place castles wherever you want inside the territory, and then you can place a quarter next to it to take 5 tiles worth of a yield. It's kinda setting up a logging camp in a dense forest!

Here I could place it next to the coffee and get 15 from all the surrounding tiles.

A very nice harbor.

In the full game, you'll need to develop your city core with common quarters, which removes the tile yields and exploits none, but gives a lot of stability the more districts surround it. So you end up with a cosmopolitan city center surrounded by exploitation "towns". And then, once you have set up a good exploitation web, you turn to infrastructure.

This one means +1 industry in any exploited tiles that produces industry.

If you make it at the beginning, it takes a lot of turns (around 6) and would only give a few prod back from your the limited amount of tiles you are exploiting (maybe 5-6 production). If I do it after I expanded, attached territories and such, it would give A LOT.

Once the "low hanging fruit" has been taken and you have a good amount of food and production, you can start focusing on trying to maximize each "hub", adding more quarters, like makers quarters to take more of the surrounding forest, or adding trader quarters around your harbors. And then, all those separate hubs will start joining together.

In many 4Xs, you always felt you weren't managing an empire, but a collection of cities that were barely related to each other, only aggregating their yields. Here, the focus is on managing a smaller number of cities (in terms of selecting what to build), which work like administration centers, and build extraction hubs where the yields are stronger anywhere in huge expansions of land.

The design is simple, but manages to create an extremely natural and history inspired development of civilizations. Take control of an area, first focus on the most profitable yield/area, set up your "primary" economy of yield extraction, once that's up and running focus on infrastructure and more advanced yields like science and money.

As another poster said: "I'm creating these small villages and settlements in key areas to complement my big cities". That's something extremely unique in the 4X landscape, and a real beauty to see ingame.

 

[Uberfrog]

This all looks really interesting! I don’t have OpenDev access yet, but I can’t wait to play for myself.

Thanks for the write-up, this sounds like a good system.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Expansion

I think it is really nice thing that they use money as the primary expansion resource while industry is used as the primary development resource, this mean they avoid issues with one resource being too important or something to be ignored.

Exploitation

The fact that each extensions can only exploit certain resources add a new form of complexity over just trying to find a way to maximize adjacency between the extensions and the unique extensions seems to have massive impact in terms of twisting upon the basic adjacency rules, like babylon become a food/science culture due to its unqiue quarter, when in general industry and science go hands in hands.

 

[Elhoim]

I think it is really nice thing that they use money as the primary expansion resource while industry is used as the primary development resource, this mean they avoid issues with one resource being too important or something to be ignored.

Yeah, I really like how they are handling money, and I'm honestly surprised not being bothered by the lack of upkeep (which would only appear on units if you go over the general limit). In this particular scenario due to animals being easy to hunt and giving lots of money, plus a bug with Natural Wonders, it was a bit too easy to get. But I like how they kept things simple in a good way. Some might see money as a replacement for production since you can buy stuff, but if you go that way you'll be hurting your expansion. And production with these "hubs" is much easier to get from base tiles vs money which is mostly a quarter resource excepting a few unique tiles.

The fact that each extensions can only exploit certain resources add a new form of complexity over just trying to find a way to maximize adjacency between the extensions and the unique extensions seems to have massive impact in terms of twisting upon the basic adjacency rules, like babylon become a food/science culture due to its unqiue quarter, when in general industry and science go hands in hands.

Yeah, I really like quarters only extracting from tiles their main resource. Since you can't take everything from a single tile, you have to make concessions. City centers are the exception, which makes attaching territories interestingly strong.

And I was saying above, I love how they are handling the terrain, by making it a focus of food vs production. You have some unique tiles that give some science (strategic resources, caves, reefs, craters, etc) and only some money like luxury resources. This creates a nice split between "primary" yields which are food and production, that when you have a lot of them, you start develop infrastructure to create the secondary ones (money/science).

Regarding money generation, I like how THEMATIC it is. Basically, money doesn't feel it comes from nowhere, but the ties with farms and harbors implies the commerce generated by selling these resources. And this is a huge plus for me, crafting a believable world instead of yields appearing out of nowhere due to abstract, artificial rules. Same with Natural Wonders. I love that they just grant a huge benefit to the city that has them in terms of cultural influence, population happiness and money from the trade generated from "tourism". No need to make them granting magical abilities that muddle the game with complexity that doesn't have much depth.

Basically, the game is pretty simple in it's rules, but it's the relationship between them that makes the design shine.

 

[tedhebert]

Thanks for the great writeup, @Elhoim. You've pout down in writing quite a few things i couldn't cleary explain but really felt.

I like the fact that they've basically done away with both settlers and workers/builders. It takes us away from ways to do things we've seen too often in other 4X games. Scouts can create outposts, which is genius to me. Way to make Scouts much more useful. And what builders normally do is now controlled at city/outpost level. I really like that,

But you're absolutely right. We so much have the reflex to build around city center that i never even questioned it. Thanks for the insight !

 

[Elhoim]

Thanks for the great writeup

You are welcome!

I like the fact that they've basically done away with both settlers and workers/builders.

Yeah, that as well, and it makes a lot more sense historically. The main way to expand was to send a military force and make an outpost. Then you invest in sending people.

We so much have the reflex to build around city center that i never even questioned it

Yeah, and what's funny is that it doesn't make any sense when you think about it. You should place your exploitation infrastructure where the resources are and then build industries around them.

In my second run I wanted to get as much production as possible, so I started building a lot of maker quarters around my city, which had no raw production to build from, and gave very little and was my worst run overall. Once I started thinking outside the box and placing my quarters where the yields were, everything went WAY more smoothly.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

I like the fact that they've basically done away with both settlers and workers/builders. It takes us away from ways to do things we've seen too often in other 4X games. Scouts can create outposts, which is genius to me. Way to make Scouts much more useful. And what builders normally do is now controlled at city/outpost level. I really like that,

They have also made early military more useful since you can hunt animals for money and also destroy and defend outposts.

In my second run I wanted to get as much production as possible, so I started building a lot of maker quarters around my city, which had no raw production to build from, and gave very little and was my worst run overall. Once I started thinking outside the box and placing my quarters where the yields were, everything went WAY more smoothly.

It make alot of sense, if you can ignore the terrain it would make a large part of the economy very simple.

 

[mitsho]

I feel like "Money" and "Industry" are the wrong terms here. I mean they are better than Gold and Production, but that's not a hard task either. The distinction between the two is actually meaningless if you take a long view as in "the whole of history". So, it's a good thing that they apparently manage to distinguish them gameplay wise other than "stockpileable/non-local" and "spent-every-turn/local". Namely by the function they are used for. Not sure what better terms could be, I'd probably need to understand how upkeep works first.

By the way, science and culture are equally dumb names for the yields - but I get why 4x stay with these naming conventions, as players are used to them. Culture f.e. is much closer to "governance" than "creative outputs of people". In general, the borders between the yields vanish more and more the more you think about them. So yes, it is important to me that these yields feel realistic and emulating of history and the development of cities and civilization.

And thank you for that wonderful opening post, it makes me very optimistic for the game!

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

In reality money is used as an exchange medium for goods. Ancient economics gdp seems to be estimated based on stuff like food prices, so argubly you can say that food should be money and the money resource should be removed but that would probably lead to imbalances and also the money resource do somewhat represent the activity of your trade network something food or industry don't do.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Don't forget, that by leaving the basic Victory Condition, Fame, and Combat, one of the basic '4Xs', out of the first OpenDev it potentially warps the 'optimal strategy' a bit. IF, as I suspect, expanding into new territories with Outposts gains Fame, building Extensions gains Fame, certainly Fame is gained by defeating/killing enemy armies/units, and just maybe Fame is gained by having the largest population or largest city in population, that would might quickly change the best decisions to make as to development. It will be very interesting to see how the Fame Generation relates to the best city or region development.

And when Combat is added, a bunch of things might change. People have posted about how useful Scouts are to hunt down animals and 'seize' new territories, but also it has been noted how easy it is to 'ransack' or destroy Outposts that aren't defended. That means expansion near another Faction could be very dicey indeed, and IF the Minor Factions that have been hinted at act like the ones in Endless Legend, which formed small armies and roamed their own and neighboring territories, then Scouts could have a 'short life and an exciting one' in the late early game.

There are potentially some more intriguing interactions yet to be revealed between systems we haven't had a chance to see in play . . .

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

A culture's affinity give a bonus to fame for doing what its affinity is about, like a science culture get more fame from developing technologies which is probably a big deal if you want to maximize your fame.

 

[tedhebert]

I must say I'm still confused on the terminologies used: Extension, districts and infrastructure. I have access to the game, and STILL it's unclear to me what is what ;-( I mouseover the top center menu of city yields, and can't seem to make it work with what I mouseover from exploited tiles. It's quite confusing.

EDIT: I have gone and read more closely the material from @Safe91. I think I have a better understanding on the terminologies...It's mostly extensions, of which district seem to be part of but not the totality of... still confusing, but I get it now

Also, I have problems figuring out the advantages and disadvantages of linking an outpost to a city VS creating another city from the outpost. in both instances, the stile chosen for the outpost starts exploiting all adjacent tiles. I'm not sure I see the advantages of making that one city bigger. It creates administrations centers when you link, but then only the main city can produce infra/districts, not the centers. OTOH, a new city will be able to produce. I guess it's normal to not see clearly yet what are the benefits of both, since we have a very narrow view of all the systems, but I expected to have a better understanding because it seemed like the main goal of THAT scenario

EDIT: I'm also beginning to understand that many infrastructures give yield by the number of territories attached to the city. So that's an incentive to attach VS creating another city. I've a feeling there'll be many interesting decisions to make here


EDIT ADD: One of the civ reflex I had a lot of trouble getting rid of is the one where a tile can only be worked by population. Your city has 3 pop ? then only 3 tiles can be exploited. It's completely different in HK ! You can have only 4 pop yet easily have 10/15 tiles exploited if you built the right extensions for your city. It's really different and I like different ;-)

 

[Elhoim]

Also, I have problems figuring out the advantages and disadvantages of linking an outpost to a city VS creating another city from the outpost. in both instances, the stile chosen for the outpost starts exploiting all adjacent tiles. I'm not sure I see the advantages of making that one city bigger. It creates administrations centers when you link, but then only the main city can produce infra/districts, not the centers. OTOH, a new city will be able to produce. I guess it's normal to not see clearly yet what are the benefits of both, since we have a very narrow view of all the systems, but I expected to have a better understanding because it seemed like the main goal of THAT scenario

EDIT: I'm also beginning to understand that many infrastructures give yield by the number of territories attached to the city. So that's an incentive to attach VS creating another city. I've a feeling there'll be many interesting decisions to make here

There are many advantages:

- As you said, there are infrastructures that give yields per territory attached.
- Similarly, there are others that affect all exploitations. You need only to build it once to affect all territories (vs building in one city).
- Concentrated production yields. As for the infrastructures that affect exploitation, it's faster to build it once in a city that has 200 production (1 turn), than in each of 4 cities that produce 50 (4 turns) to get the same yield result.
- Food yields being concentrated allow easier reaching of super growth.

The drawbacks:

- Total population increases faster in separate cities. The growth mechanic limits it to one pop every 4 turns, no matter the food. So 3 cities at normal growth can produce 50% more citizens than a single city in super growth.
- Lower stability in general.
- If the cities are administered you have more unit production points (remember that a city without administrators can't produce units and have lower yields). On the other hand, concentrated production allows much faster unit creation and you can spawn them in forts, so that also evens it out.

In general, it's a good balance to have the number of cities equal to the administrators you have, and the rest attached to them when stability allows. Remember that low stability makes gaining civics slower, so that's another thing to balance.

 

[Shadowhal]

Two other potential reasons to create a new city vs attaching the outpost:
1. The cost of attaching outposts rise the more are already attached, right? So, at some point it may not be the most efficient use of money.
2. There may be a territory with very juicy yields, e.g. from special tiles or natural wonders, that is too far away to attach directly. By creating a city you could benefit from those yields sooner.

That's a bit speculative, since I don't have OpenDev access.

I had another question in that regard: once an outpost has become a city, can that city ever join another city? I believe the devs said at some point that we can "join cities", but I'm not sure now whether that referred to the outpost mechanic or actual joining of full-fledged cities. Not sure it would ever make sense, but could be interesting I suppose.

Or the opposite - can a territory ever be un-attached and split off as a city?

 

[Catoninetales_Amplitude]

Culture f.e. is much closer to "governance" than "creative outputs of people".

I believe the yield is called Influence, but the system it is involved in is Culture.

Don't forget, that by leaving the basic Victory Condition, Fame, and Combat, one of the basic '4Xs', out of the first OpenDev it potentially warps the 'optimal strategy' a bit. IF, as I suspect, expanding into new territories with Outposts gains Fame, building Extensions gains Fame, certainly Fame is gained by defeating/killing enemy armies/units, and just maybe Fame is gained by having the largest population or largest city in population, that would might quickly change the best decisions to make as to development. It will be very interesting to see how the Fame Generation relates to the best city or region development.

Don't forget that researching technology, generating Influence, and making money also grant Fame.

- If the cities are administered you have more unit production points (remember that a city without administrators can't produce units and have lower yields).

We're actually still experimenting with that part. As far as I know, in the OpenDev unadministered cities can build units, but the tooltip doesn't reflect that.

I had another question in that regard: once an outpost has become a city, can that city ever join another city? I believe the devs said at some point that we can "join cities", but I'm not sure now whether that referred to the outpost mechanic or actual joining of full-fledged cities. Not sure it would ever make sense, but could be interesting I suppose.

Or the opposite - can a territory ever be un-attached and split off as a city?

Yes, cities can be merged later in the game. And while I don't think you can "unattach" a territory, as far as I recall they can be swapped between cities, but it's been a long time since I tried that so it may not be accurate anymore. I'll double-check that later today if I have some time.

 

[Shadowhal]

Yes, cities can be merged later in the game. And while I don't think you can "unattach" a territory, as far as I recall they can be swapped between cities, but it's been a long time since I tried that so it may not be accurate anymore. I'll double-check that later today if I have some time.

Thanks for confirming. It will be interesting how you managed to solve that, e.g. which improvements get kept or whether all improvements built in either city will become part of the combined city, and which of the two city cores will become the one for the combined city. And a few other things probably.

What situations is that mechanic most used for? Merging smaller cities to create a big one? In connection with conquest? Presumably, the player will have previously considered whether to create a new city in the first place, although options for later correction are of course welcome.

 

[mitsho]

I believe the yield is called Influence, but the system it is involved in is Culture.

See, I already like Influence much more, but I really need to learn the terminology. I for example just noticed I have no idea what the „Culture“ system actually does in Humankind. Or whether Governance would be a better term for it.

 

[Catoninetales_Amplitude]

See, I already like Influence much more, but I really need to learn the terminology. I for example just noticed I have no idea what the „Culture“ system actually does in Humankind. Or whether Governance would be a better term for it.

I think "Culture" fits the system, because it's all about your values, your customs, and your "Civics" (gameplay term here) spreading to other territories.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Do merge cities merge their population?

 

[Elhoim]

1. The cost of attaching outposts rise the more are already attached, right? So, at some point it may not be the most efficient use of money.
2. There may be a territory with very juicy yields, e.g. from special tiles or natural wonders, that is too far away to attach directly. By creating a city you could benefit from those yields sooner.

Yeah, those are good points, especially number 2. Attaching to a city is much cheaper for the first outposts. The current balance in open dev is:

- City: 100/250/400.
- Attachment: 50/100/150/200/250.

So the "money saving" balance seems to be to attach one or two outposts to your first city. Attaching a third one is more expensive than outright building a city, plus the stability would be taking a big hit already. A third city in the beginning is hardly recommended, since you ran out of administrators and for 250 gold you can attach two territories to your second city and still have 100 left. But of course, as you said, you might find a far-off wonder and might be the best investment to plop a city and get 10 gold per turn for it.

BTW, the attachment cost is per city. So the first outpost in any city is 50, even if you had 3 in another one. Plus there's also a tech bonus that lowers the value. The game REALLY encourages to attach territories, and I'm thankful for it, as managing a lower number of cities makes the game much more enjoyable. In Civ I really like the beginning when you have a few cities and you care what happens in them. By the end, with 20-30, the game just becomes an endless pop-up of generics what to build that has less and less impact.