A LONG subjective but orderly list of non - bug improvements and suggestions

Discussion in 'Humankind - General Discussions' started by Krajzen, Aug 21, 2021.

  1. Krajzen

    Krajzen Deity

    Oct 23, 2013
    I know there is already a thread for this, but I wanted to create my own take on it, made in a more strict format, and as you will see: goddamn this definitely shouldn't be a message in somebody else's thread.

    Humankind has many admirable qualities, I definitely more believe in my ability to enjoy this game than I have ever believed in civ6 which has annoyed me on every level, from the smallest details through almost every major mechanic to the broadest concepts of its apparent design philosophy. Besides, I have witnessed rise of many strategy games from Various States of Difficult Launch to glory and acclaim, and I believe Humankind can reach this point as well. Probably more than civ6 ever could, with its very fundamental systems being conductive to enormous micromanagement and complete inability of AI to play them (I still believe that it is technologically impossible at this point to create AI that is both capable of managing this kind of combat system and do it with very short turn processing times).

    Still, it has a long way to go, with an enormous balance issue of skyrocketing yields, and a variety of other problems. Devs at https://www.games2gether.com/amplit...humankind-gameplay-2gether?page=4#post-329063 have created a thread to directly write down suggestions on how to improve it. And goddamn did I try to deliver a constructive overview here.

    The greatest problem of a game, skyrocketing yields/yield superinflation/snowballing/singularity, I have already founded a separate thread about, and it's largely the same as my post in the aforementioned thread. But I wanted to copy here also a content of another post I made here, of Various Suggestions and Issues. Many of whom were inspired by this very subforum.


    1) A lot of people complain on the fact, that cultural rotation of opponent players is very disorientating. You have no idea who Zulus were before, and where are they. To counter this massive UI issue I suggest two things:
    a) You could make it easily available to see total "cultural progression" of all players, at any point of the game - for example by hovering over one of their icons on the main screen. It would be so useful.
    b) More radical proposal. I think it would make the clarity so much better, but if you have mixed feelings about it, it could be an optional toggle. Make cultures have hybrid names, which would clearly indicate what was the past culture of a present culture. Such as:
    Egyptians, then
    Greek - Egyptians, then
    Franco - Greeks, then
    Dutch - Franks, then
    Mexican - Dutch, then
    Swedish - Mexican
    I don't think it would be hard to program and it would massively help solving this huge UI issue.
    c) An alternate idea would be to name players consistently after the AI Avatar, but personally I have mixed feelings about it (it could be optional too...)
    d) By the way, fame score of each player should be instantly visible under main screen icons already, without the need to hover over the Fame banner.
    2) Another UI issue: diplomatic state of the world is extremely unclear, I have no idea who is having what relations with whom.
    a) A single Diplomatic Relations screen which displays all cultures relations with each other, and their attitudes to each other, trades etc would be great - civ5 did that.
    b) A "diplomatic map mode" - I switch it and I click on cultures and it colors players based on their diplomatic status with a selected culture. EU4 does that.
    3) Some sort of ingame statistics comparing players would not only be very fun to many players (I love statistics in games...), but very useful as well, because otherwise you have no idea in what areas of the game you are inferior when compared with other players and how much. I don't know if I have bad or great yield in a given category in the early game, until I reach the Singularity and they skyrocket to infinity by the medieval era, but that's a separate issue I have described in the previous post.
    4) Cities need to indicate when there's a food shortage without requiring the player to enter the city in order to uncover this information
    5) It would be great if there was some sort of button, available at any point of the game, which heavily highlights borders of either a chosen territory, or all territories.
    6) It would be great if peace interface allowed picking cities from a map itself, not just from a list. Additionally, it would be great if there was an indication 'this outpost territory belongs to that city', without having to go out and into the map to check that.
    7) Please give a preview of what the yield change would be for a certain infrastructures
    8) Please make districts more visible, either in general or by introducing some toggle coloring them (automatically switching on when you wanna build a new one)
    9) It would be great if Total Science Output was visible on the main screen, without needing to go into the tech screen, so at every point of the game you may know how significant your changes to science yields are.
    10) Minor factions: a separate map mode highlighting them and showing who is dominant over them, as well as a separate list containing all of them and your relations with them.
    11) Mid level zoom is terrible. The graphics of Humankind are so beautiful, the world looks so great, and then you zoom out just a bit and it transforms into very ugly and very uninformative grey fog. It should either remain in the 'normal graphics mode' longer, or the entire mid level zoom view should be redesigned into something prettier and more useful.
    12) Ingame encyclopedia and tooltips are missing a ton of vital explanations regarding a ton of game mechanics, for example what is a 'victorious city' for the Roman Triumphal Arch, how do you exactly achieve Mars Colony victory, what is exactly Sphere of Influence and what it does etc.
    13) It is very unclear in combat when certain units have high ground over others, there should be some system of colors of icons to show that.
    14) Similarly, line of sight and range are very unclear.
    15) It would be great if there were notification settings allowing me to choose between "Don't even display this to me as those small notifications", "Keep it default" and even "Display it to me as a popup in the middle of a screen"
    16) It would be great if there was a toggle allowing me to automatically refuse AI offers for some time, or from some leader, or at the very specific subject.
    17) A notification "A player X conquered player Z's city" would be useful, as it is a massive event.
    18) Another great map mode would be a Trade map mode, allowing you to browse trade routes between players and what do they exactly bring.
    19) It would be great if there was a notification "you can claim wonders" and "another player has claimed a wonder". Also, the button for wonder claiming should be more indicative of "yes this is what are you looking for frantically, this is where you can claim wonder, this is the picture of a pyramid".
    20) I forgot about that regarding combat: some indication what units can still shoot/can't shoot anymore but can still move would be very useful.
    21) I have no idea where can I see my total faith output, but the entire religion system is so opaque and weird that it wouldn't help me anyway, as I wouldn't know what does it mean to have 500 faith and how does it relate to anything.
    22) One of desperately needed UI toggles is "instant army movement", or "fast/very fast army movement". I don't mean the battle map, I mean the campaign map, which is traversed by troops annoyingly slowly when there is a lot of them.

    1) I shall include ingame statistics here again, because I want to know how other players are doing and compare them with myself
    2) Also, I'd like to know what others achieved - their Deeds, their Wonders, them getting... I'd go even further in this proposal: there should be a way to specifically check what stars did exactly every other player achieve (hover mouse tooltip or separate screen), so I can check their progress!
    3) It's extremely minor thing, but 'Hipster' personality trait of AI avatars (choose unpopular civics) is kind of immersion breaking and weird, it should be renamed to something like Rebel, Contrarian, Heretic or whatever, but not a freakin 21st century coffee hipster, this really collides with the grandiosity of the game.
    4) Religion names are very non - immersive; it is really strange how they are all named after (mostly) dead ancient cultures through thousands of years, and that they are all just polytheism and shamanism. Excuse me, where is monotheism for example, or whatever Buddhism is? In general I think Certain Other Game's Approach is much more relatable, where religions are named after real life major religions. The entire religion system will get an inevitable expansion anyway, but until that happens just renaming religions would be great to make it feel more real.
    5) City names. It is really weird (and boring!) how ancient city names are preserved through millenia, seeing how radically they changed through real history. Of course human player can rename them, but he/she's still stuck in a world when in 21st century all major capitals are named as if he/she was stuck in the ancient Middle East.
    In my opinion the system should be randomized, so every time a culture switches there is a chance city names change to a new city name list as well.
    6) I'm not sure if it is done already, and to what degree, but it would be great if cultures themselves also influenced the personality of AI avatars, so you can have the feeling of 'god damn my neighbor is Huns, they will ruin me'.
    7) In fact, just a little bit of flavor given to cultures would be great. Just a little bit, as there are sixty of them total. Especially some unique diplomatic quotes for their leaders. It would be just a text, but it would make them more characteristic.
    8) It's great that we have this dedicated cinematic and screen at the end of the game. They could be more: for example, a replay of a map showing what cultures grabben what territory when. More graphs and charts. An interactive table of deeds and wonders and who achieved them and when.
    9) The "IRL" calendar in game is extremely out of sync with how the game actually progresses through next eras, I forgot to note it down but I recall it's literally millenias behind appropriate historical periods. Of course that problem is heavily tied to infinitely bigger balance problem of players approaching technological singularity and blazing through eras very quickly at some point.
    10) There are very few and repeating rewards you get from Curiosities. More variety of yields and rewards would be great - such as free units happening more often and being more varied, bonus production for the nearest city, combinations of yields, permanent buffs to units discovering them (such as bonus traits, speed, strength) etc.
    11) "Army camp and flag" equivalent makes no sense for naval battles, when it is just some arbitrary part of water.
    12) This one may be unfortunately completely impossible to solve at this point, but the downside of very few actual cities on the map (the upside being so much less micromanagement) is that the map feels way smaller than in the other 4x games like this... No idea how to deal with that. Maybe if administrative centres were more visible I'd feel more of an 'ah yes my empire has many cities, with few major capitals' instead of 'my empire has five cities and farms in between'

    GENERAL ISSUES WITH GAME MECHANICS (excluding the Great Problem of Yields)
    1) Neolithic age is slightly too fast and too luck based. I really like its base concept, and I have no idea how to push it more towards 'strategic choices' area, but it would be great. I had some attempts when AI was getting out of it after like seven turns and I had simply no way to do it until like turn twenty, despite my best efforts. I even had a situation where I couldn't find any influence in curiosities for like thirty turns (while otherwise I'd find it in half of them), and I was greatly delayed in my first outposts.
    2) Also, am I the only one who finds animal hunting to be completely unviable strategy in general? It is too dangerous and brings too little.
    3) Battle spoils, and especially ransack spoils and city captures spoils should be MUCH greater (do they even exist for city capture?). It is especially jarring in later eras, when as I have mentioned in the previous post, I have 300,000 gold and get like two hundred from a ransack. It should scale with eras.
    4) All event rewards, and I mean all of them, should be extremely higher in later eras, because it's really absurd when I have that proverbial 300,000 gold and a dramatic event offers me like five hundred more pieces; it really ruins the narrative.
    5) AI should be very willing to exploit me having no armies (if it is even slightly warlike). Currently I was able to spend entire ages with basically no military at all, nobody exploited that fact.
    6) AI should also always maintain some significant army if it has a decent empire that can sustain it, it does it sometimes but not consistently - I have steamrolled #2 empire on the map expecting an epic war and getting almost no armed resistance. Otherwise, it should quickly mobilize all its resources to create army as necessary - that too didn't happen.
    7) Our opinions may vary on this subject, but I think AI is not agressive and reactive enough in general (Empire difficulty) - it is always an excitement in games like this to face this militarist AI empire which is performing truly massive, relentless conquests against all other players. So far I have encountered many AI - AI wars, but they don't result in anything more than one city sometimes changing hands.
    8) City cap should be more lenient in the first two eras of a game, to allow you other strategic approaches beyond 'I have two cities and a lot of territories' - for example going wide and especially an ability to actually conquer some enemy cities in those ages.
    9) Stability is very easy to achieve and very predictable, thanks to super easy and powerful luxury resource trade deals. It should be much harder to maintain, especially if you are
    10) One thing that would help against runaways would be great (and I mean GREAT not some meager +50% fame) benefits and incentives for smaller players to compete against stronger players in any way.
    11) Balance issues (other than Yield Hyperinflation and Technological Singularity): there are many 'dilemmas' in the game which are very unbalanced towards one option.
    - There are some cultures which are really weak (especially all Aestethes in the later half of the game, as there is nothing to spend influence on) (India especially breaks my heart because not only it boosts useless yield in the last era, it also boosts religion which is irrelevant by that time).
    - Then there are extremely overpowered ones such as: Khmer's Baray (that was the beginning of my own Yield Hyperinflation), Mughal's production trait (instant doubled production in the capital for no effort is crazy in comparision to other Early Modern traits), Turkish Public School (isn't that actually some sort of bug or one zero too much?) etc.
    - Many events could use a balance check, as they present fairly obvious 'dilemmas'.
    - Some infrastructures are incredibly overpowered in comparision to others at the same cost (my favourite is, unlocked roughly at the same time, "get cumulative +60 production from river tiles" vs for the same cost "+3 gold on city plaza").
    - I have said it like three times but I have to repeat it: luxury trade deals are infinitesimely cheap, basically free, for how enormous benefits they offer. They should be both harder to get and less influential.
    - People started posting screnshots of early modern? ship Man o War defeating modern submarines, so here's that.
    12) Tech tree has way not enough interdependencies, which allows for extreme beeling of techs, allowing on many immersive absurdities (advanced tech without very basic medieval level science) as well as making the balance issues even worse. What am I trying to say, it would be much better if you couldn't go very far into next era without researching almost all techs from the previous era. Although people's opinion may vary here.
    13) There is a massive problem with a game, which is not a 'bug' but an unfortunate result of combat system, namely that sieges can go forever - and AI is often indeed stuck in them forever, never retreating. Even when its losing its empire in the same time, and its besieging army is really needed. Nope, let's be stuck in this siege for 100 turns. This is especially problematic because any third party units caught in the siege area can't move, which disabled part of my army forever. Solution: please either AI break sieges after x amount of turns, or make sieges themselves end after like 10 turns because of "starving defenders" or whatever.
    14) I have somehow managed to finish the game while unlocking only like 20% of civics dilemmas in the civic tree... This stuff really shouldn't be so random if it's so cool and so important for both mechanics and narrative. In my opinion following civic dilemmas should be unlocked by appropriate technologies, eras, some clear conditions how to always unlock them and when, not a random chance.
    15) The game lacks a constant irregular military threat from barbarians, nomads, pirates or whoever raiding major faction territories. Yes I know that minor factions perform that role in theory, but they don't do that in practice, they never come to my games to pillage my stuff. Maybe that occasionally happens, but in this case it is too occasional - imho there should be no point in the game when an empire is allowed to have zero military and prosper, just like in real life.

    1) There is no peaceful vassalization proposal/demand, just forced through war, which is kind of strange in a game which actually does have this wonderful mechanic (unlike certain other 4x games). This should definitely be an option when for example
    - one empire is *much stronger* than another, which is more afraid of it rather than hateful or whatever (or just loves the larger empire that much to allow it)
    - that weaker empire is very afraid of another empire, and seeks protection to ensure its survival
    2) There also should be an option to buy off empire Z to declare war against empire Y, a really important tool of rich but 'peaceful' factions.
    3) And a demand to force overlord empire to release its vassal or liberate some cities (which are very grateful and love releasing empire, likely to be vassalized)
    4) And a way to gift other players with gold, either to hopefully boost them or to sway their opinion slightly, or to sweeten the deal.
    5) And a demand for one empire to end war with another empire, or break a relationship, or embargo it.
    6) You know, it's more of an expansion idea, but it would be great if there was a mechanic of "League of Nations" or whatever, existing since the industrial era onwards, making the entire international community meet together in one place in one big voting, threatening each other with embargoes, doing international projects etc. I vaguely recall some indie obscure 4x franchise doing stuff like this in one game very well, and then ruining it in its sequel due to flying away from reality, but I'm sure Amplitude studios could do that very well, as long as you try to keep it somewhat realistic!
    7) Alliances currently merely allow for allied people to demand each other to join each other's war (and AI often doesn't do that at all). Either alliances should immediately call all its members to war, under the risk of breaking alliance and Traitor badge in case of decline, or AI should actually demand that stuff if the war seems difficult to win otherwise. As it works now, I have crushed rival empire without fighting its two allies, and without it breaking the alliance with them or demanding anything from them.

    1) Unless I have misunderstood something, there is no way to make another player pack his bags and go away from *my* minor faction - both in terms of direct military agression and rivaling influence. This results in a weird state of limbo lockdown, when there are many minors with maxed influence of several majors, none of them thus being capable of changing the status quo and actually integrating the minor.
    2) It would be great if minor factions had some very basic personality depending on their distinctive tiny culture - you know, a small graphic, an icon, a very short musical tune when you click on them...
    3) It would be great if minor factions had offered some bonuses as they exist, so you'd actually have a dilemma 'should I assimilate them or keep them alive for their bonuses'. It would be especially great if those bonuses varied - for example few categories of minor factions with their own bonuses.
    4) Cost of influencing and assimilating them is infinitesimally small in the second half of the game, they are basically free snack for my 300,000 gold behemoth.
    5) It would be cool if minor factions had some actual active interactions such as requests, events, diplomatic incidents, them going to war and small expansion as well etc.

    Oh boy, is this topic controversial. I don't think the idea to introduce war goals, restricted peace deals etc to 4x genre is a bad one, but I do think the way it is implemented is too strict and hard imposed.
    1) It is possible to begin late era war and end it within 5 turns due to quickly overwhelming some enemy cities with units and his war support dropping to zero - even if enemy empire still has a lot of enemy cities and armed forces. This shouldn't be possible, or at least not always enforced by design - did Soviet Union surrender in december 1941? It also increases the balance issues of runaway players completely dominating the game - poor AIs can't resist human blitzkrieg not even because of military inferiority, but sheer speed and exploiting how fast you can collapse their war support.
    2) In general, I think it is really bad idea to completely untie war support from the comparative strenght of nation's military, as it leads to absurdities such as above. It should be tied in some way to the remaining military power and industrial capacity etc.
    3) In general, I still think the way game artifically limits player from conquering many lands at once is too harsh. It is good for balance that it is not that easy to completely eliminate other player, but it bends into the opposite problem, where it is absurdly hard both from realist and gameplay fun perspective. After all, didn't Persian Empire quickly overwhelm rival empires? What about Alexander, Mongols, world wars, Spanish conquest of Americas, rise of Islam? Wars weren't always carefully negotiated terms, sometimes mass conquest did happen.
    4) Ironically, those restrictions made probably for balance reasons... Strike the balance from the opposite direction! As the game has a great problem with runaway empires in general, that can't be matched by anyone else ever once they hit Yield Singularity, it is impossible to quickly rise from shadows and for example do a spectacular comeback, to chase the leader via the conquest of other players. So an idea that (probably) was made to restrict snowballing also makes resisting snowballing much harder. There is this empire that is expontentially snowballing towards superpower, and I cannot do anything to quickly caught up to it, or disable it.

    If you are alive after witnessing this Great Wall of Rants, feel free to tear them to shreds and introduce your own!
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2021
    Hellenism Salesman, pokiehl and KayAU like this.
  2. Barra

    Barra Chieftain

    Oct 22, 2014
    For point 8 UI issues, there is in fact a button for it, its in the bottom right corner, keyboard short cut 0
    I had to search for it myself ;)

    To point 11: Im with you, this is probably the point which is "disturbing" me most, I would prefer , when just the last 2 Zoom clicks offer the monochrom view

    For Point 13: you see the Line of sight...somehow...when moving a unit you see a preview of the available targets, which are marked by a red hex
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2021
  3. Taefin

    Taefin Prince

    Nov 28, 2020
    I like this list! Have you seen AI yield singularity? The latest I played was a pollution triggered contemporary game, and at this point the leader AI had gotten 3-4k fame ahead, but in postgame, most of their yields appeared to grow linearly from start to end of the game. The game ended the same turn I captured 2 of their cities, so I didn’t get to see the impact on the end-game fame race, but I wonder if it was too little too late to change things. They already had 12 era stars and taking two cities off them may not have prevented them from reaching the last starts before I got enough to catch up. I think a good mechanic for the contemporary era might be to make it so that all stars can be taken away. So instead of X money/influence total, make it Y money/influence per turn. Then in at least 5 of the categories it would be possible to remove fame from the leader through warfare, even taking only a city or two at a time.

    Or in contemporary it could be about having the most of each category to get 3/2/1 era stars for being in 1st/2nd/3rd. If combined with an exponentially growing tech cost in contemporary then the player could really catch up when they hit singularity. This would all but ensure that the player would eventually win if they survive the early/mid game, unless they got extremely far behind, but would require some extreme effort to do so in many games. I think this would be more rewarding than playing through for an inevitable 2nd place.

    I do suspect that if the conquest limits were removed that then AI would swallow their entire continents by the end of classical.
  4. Ondolindë

    Ondolindë Emperor

    Apr 30, 2016
    La Paz, Bolivia
    "11) Mid level zoom is terrible. The graphics of Humankind are so beautiful, the world looks so great, and then you zoom out just a bit and it transforms into very ugly and very uninformative grey fog. It should either remain in the 'normal graphics mode' longer, or the entire mid level zoom view should be redesigned into something prettier and more useful."

    Oh, yes, please. It actually gives me a headache when it constantly changes from the normal terrain view to the gray one because I am either moving my mouse or because I want to pan out and see more. It should not flow into the gray one. Plus, I want to see the whole terrain and appreciate it. I have stopped playing because it just is painful and not really useful. Please do change that. Please.
  5. Haig

    Haig Deity

    Aug 3, 2010
    Man if they only had put minimap in this game, would be much quicker to go around the map and see where you are...
  6. KayAU

    KayAU King

    Sep 1, 2014
    That took a while to read, but I agree with most points. :) With regards to point 1, I was thinking about this earlier. I have come up with an idea which I suspect may not be very popular, but here it goes anyway:
    I get that the morphing cultures is a very key concept in Humankind, and I am both surprised and impressed by how well they actually made it work. However, when doing the inevitable comparison to the Civilization series, it is hard to deny that the lack of a recognizable figurehead for each empire, combined with the ever-changing cultural flavour, makes the interactions with your fellow players a great deal less engaging and flavourful. I agree with the idea some have presented about making the AI avatar what identifies each empire, but I think it might not be enough. I am on my third game right now, and while I am really enjoying myself, when it comes to the figures in charge of each empire, I couldn't tell you the name or a single characteristic of any of them. Putting them more front and center might help a bit, but to really give them some flavour and make me care about them, I think you need to make them into more defined and distinctive characters, perhaps even with an ability or two of their own. You could do this with entirely made up characters, or you could do it with historical characters like in Civ. Sure, it would be a bit weird to encounter Ghengis Khan of the Olmecs, but let's be fair, it isn't really that much sillier than anything else that is going on. In my current game I am Kay, the Immortal leader of the Egyptians, which then became Persians, then Norse, and currently we are Dutch for a while.

    Another approach might be to tone down the "becoming an entirely different culture" thing which happens with each new era. You choose the empire name yourself, and it sticks throughout the game. When you reach a new era, you may acquire a set of traits from a historical culture, but you continue being you.

    And of course, as @Krajzen suggests, just making the cultural progression more visible would probably help quite a bit. You could do this with something like hybrid names, you could display it under the avatar during diplomacy, or you could even do a full empire information screen for each empire in the game. This is could be what greeted you when you clicked on one of the empire buttons at the top, with a full sumary of the empire name, the leader, their current and past cultures and a list of all inherited traits. This would add an extra click to get to the diplomacy dialogue, but I personally wouldn't mind. At the moment, as far as I know, the only place you get to see the progression of each empire is during the end-game summary.
    KrikkitTwo likes this.
  7. Ornen

    Ornen Warlord

    Feb 25, 2006
    The mid-level zoom thing is the single most baffling design choice in Humankind. How could anyone think the current version is good?
    Ondolindë and kaspergm like this.
  8. Pfeffersack

    Pfeffersack Deity

    May 10, 2003
    I already wrote it in another thread - but I can't express how much Civ6's map tacks have spoiled me....and how dearly I'm miss them in HK. The pain is increased by the fact how similar the items in Civ6 and HK are you plan with those tacks...and they are simply not there :cry: Having no minimap for quick navigation is bad and makes navigating an unnecessary chore...but the absence of a map marking system for planning your own lands (HK only nows markers for foreign territory) is cutting deeply in the fun I have with district puzzling in HK compared to Civ6 :(
  9. DrCron

    DrCron Prince

    Dec 25, 2012
    This is actually good strategy, the AI leaves the neolithic WAY too soon. It's better to stay on it for 15-20 turns, to get a bunch of scouts (10 of them at the very least) that can be later turned into population for a strong ancient era, as well as getting the legacy from neolithic science every time (and pick production, it's always good). After you grab your 3rd scout (always split at least the first 4 or so, for faster exploration) put him on "auto-explore", scouts go straight to bonus spawn tiles on this mode (they will automatically know where they are, so no luck involved). You just need to keep 2-3 armies on manual to explore the territories where you may settle, as well as trying to find out where your closest enemy is. And of course, one army of at least 2 scouts on manual so you use them to hunt wild animals.
  10. Taefin

    Taefin Prince

    Nov 28, 2020
    Oh interesting, I’ll need to try that. I always pick food or science, but I also roll with pretty low pops early game. Does this work better with a food focus?
  11. DrCron

    DrCron Prince

    Dec 25, 2012
    Science might be ok, depending on what you do with the ancient era (eg, don't pick it if you'll play with Babylon or Zhou). I wouldn't recommend picking food, since production can always get your more food faster.
  12. Taefin

    Taefin Prince

    Nov 28, 2020
    I guess that’s where I had been seeing it differently. Usually production will eclipse my population, so that only in large low production cities (perhaps acquired from war) would I expect this bonus to be noticeable. Certainly none are particularly noticeable by mid game, but science helps nonscience cultures get through ancient, and food usually allows me to have one more non-farmer specialist from the get go. I’ll give production a try though ;)
  13. CoconutTank

    CoconutTank Unapologetic Warmonger Supporter

    Oct 23, 2014
    Macro Land
    I guess I'll add some things to the pile: I wish there was a search feature for tile features and units, like the one in Civ 6.

    For anyone not familiar, in Civ 6, there's a search function that highlights stuff on the map and can focus on individual results on the map. This is most useful when one is looking for strategic resources and luxury resources, as one may miss them when scouring the map by human eye. This search is also useful for finding wonders and where they may be, along with specific units that one may need special attention for.

    Also, I'm not sure how or where this information should show up, but I was really surprised to learn about the Space Station requiring a 5-tile wide cluster that's free of districts. That was absolutely unexpected, and I almost didn't have enough land anywhere to build it.

    I think otherwise I agree with a lot of the points brought up in the original post :) I don't know if I'll respond to each thing that I intend to respond to, so I'll just pick a few ones and accept that for now.

    I haven't found the internal game wiki to be particularly viable, but in comparison the Humankind fandom wiki seems to be very helpful for explaining some of these details. For Faith in particular:

    Afaik, Faith in this game is basically like religious pressure from Civ 6, and being able to pick tenets is based on how many followers one has (as opposed to spending Apostles to get beliefs in Civ 6).

    IMO, the HK tenets are pretty darn good, and they make the Civ 6 beliefs look really anemic in comparison.

    "Smite Unbelievers" is near equivalent to Conscription for free and an unconditional +5 str to every military unit you build for the rest of the game.

    "Abstain from Intoxicants" is near equivalent to +2 hammers to every worked forest in your territory, regardless of whether it's improved or not.

    "Hunt the Infidels" is near equivalent to causing rival civs to generate so much grievances that one can take multiple cities while staying in positive grievance.

    And those are just examples of the level 1 tenets!

    Not sure if I understand correctly, but I imagine this could possibly be tuned in a few ways. If there is an average size for each region, then that could be tuned up or down to determine how much land each region takes, which would then adjust the potential number of cities.

    Hmm? I think animal hunting is really good in both the Neolithic Era and the Ancient Era, though I agree that one needs to be careful about the attrition and staying too far behind culturally.

    Being able to amass a lot of units and influence very quickly is great during the Neolithic Era, esp since cities don't have particularly strong production and influence income right at the start of the Ancient Era. The additional Scouts can be used in a bunch of ways too:
    - Disband them for pop when buying stronger military units or for forced labor.
    - Rush rival civs with a bunch of Scouts and join them with other units later to help soak up damage for them.
    - Put them all on auto-explore for random huge amounts of science and influence from curiosities.

    Animal hunting in the Ancient Era isn't as great, but gold income right at the start of the Ancient Era is pretty low, so supplementing that with animal hunting works out. Scouts and Warriors are much more durable against Mammoths and Bears than Tribes are, and animal hunting within one's borders has very little downtime (esp with Temple of Artemis).
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2021
  14. Taefin

    Taefin Prince

    Nov 28, 2020
    Is forced labor ever useful? Do you use it to buyout entire districts/infrastructure or just to shave off a turn here or there? Curious because I thought it was well balanced in Poe but have only used it since release to kill off 18 pops in an overcrowded city I conquered. Even with food cultures I find it’s easier to build more quarters or units when I get overcrowding.
  15. CoconutTank

    CoconutTank Unapologetic Warmonger Supporter

    Oct 23, 2014
    Macro Land
    Just to shave off a turn here and there, but only if I can't use buy it out with gold and if food is running low for that specific city. Admittedly forced labor is not particularly efficient, but it's possible to get a lot of Tribes during the Neolithic, and Scouts become obsolete for fighting very quickly, so I don't really want to keep that many Scouts around anyway.
  16. Taefin

    Taefin Prince

    Nov 28, 2020
    I’ll try that out, definitely as big an effect as chopping trees, and there’s no point not growing when food is neutral I guess.
  17. CoconutTank

    CoconutTank Unapologetic Warmonger Supporter

    Oct 23, 2014
    Macro Land
    Yeah exactly, if I'm losing pop anyway I might as well make it count.

Share This Page