Humankind Game by Amplitude

I'm sorry but, how to put it, I find your reasoning surprising. It's objectively exactly opposite, it is medieval era which is crazy overflowing with cultures while the later you go the LESS cultures you get. I'm surprised you didn't notice that, and yet you have noticed they cover more terrain in later eras - well damn, there are only few big empires left after centuries of conquest, and they killed off countless others, that's why they are so big :p.

Fair point about the medieval era containing more cultures than the later ones, though I wouldn't mix dynastic rules with cultures. I guess the different Christian states in Hispania were sufficiently similar to each other to represent them as one. Also with the Normans in Normandy, England, Southern Italy and Sicily.
 
Mind you, they might be alternatives rather than additions, because increasing the number of Factions per Era might be more difficult, depending on how much is hard coded about Fame generation per Era and map size requirements per Faction.

I think that what would be "hard-coded" or hard to tweak is the number of players, but increasing the list of possible civs seems quite likely, especially since UI-wise they made the list an horizontal scroll that can easily be expanded with more options.
 
@Catoninetales_Amplitude

I have a question, how do city names work if cultures potentially may change every era?

Does it work like:
In the ancient era I choose Assyrians. My cities are Nineveh and Assur.
In the classical era I switch to Persians. My third founded city is named Pasargadae, and fourth is Susa.
In the medieval I switch to Umayyads. My fifth city is called (for example) Baghdad, precious cities never change their names etc
So by the end the default outcome is such mix of cities, at least among AI players?
OR are all city names replaced with current culture's city list?

Secondary questions is, how AI players are referred to in game across many ages, if they routinely change cultures. Player 2, 3... Or Player Red, Green etc? Sounds anticlimactic, but I don't know how would I refer to them in such system.

EDIT
Now I do know how would I refer to them if I was the designer! I'd give geographic names to all main features of the world (similarly to civ6 GS) and name multi-cultural players (in those context when this is necessary instead of naming them after their contemporary culture) after those names. For example:
Player 1, in the beginning of the game, settles on the banks of the river Danube. His "meta" name, separate from contemporary cultures names, is Danubian Civilization.
Player 2 settles in the super region "Mesoamerica" and is named Mesoamerican Civilization.
Player 3 settles on the archipelago in the Pacific Ocean, is named Pacific Civilization.

And so on.
It would even roughly fit how real historiography works - where "Mesoamerica" means the cultural continuity of many civilizations in the similar geographic area etc. Same with Mesopotamia, India, Central Asia, Iranian Plateau, Andes, and so on...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: j51
I have a question, how do city names work if cultures potentially may change every era?

Does it work like:
In the ancient era I choose Assyrians. My cities are Nineveh and Assur.
In the classical era I switch to Persians. My third founded city is named Pasargadae, and fourth is Susa.
In the medieval I switch to Umayyads. My fifth city is called (for example) Baghdad, precious cities never change their names etc
So by the end the default outcome is such mix of cities, at least among AI players?
OR are all city names replaced with current culture's city list?

Secondary questions is, how AI players are referred to in game across many ages, if they routinely change cultures. Player 2, 3... Or Player Red, Green etc? Sounds anticlimactic, but I don't know how would I refer to them in such system.
Cities do not automatically rename, so the first way you describe (though I don't remember off the top of my head if the city name list starts counting at the top again or at the spot you were in the previous list.)

As for how empires are referred to, I honestly don't recall what plans we have for that. Right now, they're mostly just identified by their color and their avatar, but the designers might have further plans I am not aware of.
 
Cities do not automatically rename, so the first way you describe (though I don't remember off the top of my head if the city name list starts counting at the top again or at the spot you were in the previous list.)

As for how empires are referred to, I honestly don't recall what plans we have for that. Right now, they're mostly just identified by their color and their avatar, but the designers might have further plans I am not aware of.

It would be great of just the capital renamed!
 
It would be great of just the capital renamed!

One easy way - and gamer-friendly - would be when you choose a new Faction, a pop-up gives you a suggested new Capital name. As you 'mouse over' your current cities, a new name based on your new Faction could pop up - your choice whether to rename or not, but some guidance to help your decision.
 
One easy way - and gamer-friendly - would be when you choose a new Faction, a pop-up gives you a suggested new Capital name. As you 'mouse over' your current cities, a new name based on your new Faction could pop up - your choice whether to rename or not, but some guidance to help your decision.

I really like this concept, as a middle ground between fully renaming your Empire and fully maintaining the original names as a historial footprint of your different cultures.

That being said, I believe that renaming the cities shouldn't be free. It could be a city project, a reward for some kind of achievement, or it could also be an option from one random (or triggered) event.
 
I do appreciate this guy's mapping effort, but I was never the fan of putting many overlapping empires on the map in the same time, it ends being a real mess of arbitrarily redrawn borders (like that European map of his, where I genuinely have no idea what am looking at). I think better mapping approaches are
1) One culture at time
2) Minimalistic approach, where for example "Mongolia" is just modern day Mongolia's borders etc
3) One era at time, if borders overlap then you do the 'two-colored stripes' thing (does this thing have a specific English name, so I could found out how to do it if I was doing my own mapping? :p )
 
I discovered the Humankind subreddit and it has some gems.

This is a reddit post for the culture art cards so far. Note the four new images for the last three remaining eras that (I think) we haven't seen before:
https://www.reddit.com/r/HumankindT...kind_culture_arts_compilation_in_card_format/

And this guy tries to map all of the cultures revealed so far (your move @bite):
https://www.reddit.com/r/HumankindTheGame/comments/hi29m0/civ_chain_by_geographic_zones/

The 'German' and 'Ming' ones have been floating around since the games annoucement but I have not seen that 'Joseon' one

The 'American/Australians' one is hopefully an event artwork it really wouldent look right as a culture card.
 
Tid-bit from the official forums:

Poster: As I recall, a lot of achievements depend on how well you were doing when an era began. If you have a lot of territories and your neighbor only has a few, you have to settle or conquer a lot more area to get the same amount of fame your neighbor does, and it's the same for techs, unit destruction, gold and influence production, and other things.

Dev: You're absolutely right. I can't go too much into details though, as we mays still change things for balancing purpose.

I really love this catch-up mechanic. It doesn't stink of rubber banding since it makes A LOT of sense. If you are great, greater things are expected of you. If you are small country, and you do something out of your league (which could be small by a huge empire standard), you are definitely fame-worthy.
 
Tid-bit from the official forums:

Poster: As I recall, a lot of achievements depend on how well you were doing when an era began. If you have a lot of territories and your neighbor only has a few, you have to settle or conquer a lot more area to get the same amount of fame your neighbor does, and it's the same for techs, unit destruction, gold and influence production, and other things.

Dev: You're absolutely right. I can't go too much into details though, as we mays still change things for balancing purpose.

I really love this catch-up mechanic. It doesn't stink of rubber banding since it makes A LOT of sense. If you are great, greater things are expected of you. If you are small country, and you do something out of your league (which could be small by a huge empire standard), you are definitely fame-worthy.

That's a nice catch-up mechanic indeed. I really like it. Without this mechanic, you could have bigger, more powerful civs naturally gaining more fame and thus running away with the game. This mechanic will make it harder for bigger empires to runaway with the game and allow smaller empires a chance to catch up in fame.
 
I really love this catch-up mechanic. It doesn't stink of rubber banding since it makes A LOT of sense. If you are great, greater things are expected of you. If you are small country, and you do something out of your league (which could be small by a huge empire standard), you are definitely fame-worthy.

This is from what I understand:
Let's say, if I play in the Early Modern Era as the Dutch (which is a good example IRL), compared with my neighbour the territorially larger transcended Umayyads, I can compensate my smallness by doing great things in the economy and earn more fame points that way. Meanwhile, the Umayyads will have to live up to the standards of everyone in order to increase their fame.
 
Yes, if you have expanded to say 10 regions in the last era, your expansion goal is now 8 more, meaning 18 for that fame star. Whereas your smaller neighbour had only 5 Regions, so they have to get 4 more, meaning in total 9 for their same value fame star.

Numbers of course completely made up, but that is how I understand it, and I like it. Also, in the above example, you might be smaller, but more scientifically advanced. So the other culture has to research fewer technologies to get their science fame star than you comparatively. I like it.
 
Numbers of course completely made up, but that is how I understand it, and I like it. Also, in the above example, you might be smaller, but more scientifically advanced. So the other culture has to research fewer technologies to get their science fame star than you comparatively. I like it.

And then, following that logic, once you enter the late game, it's less a matter of who has the most territory and more of a matter of who gets the most fame out of conquering territory. If the smaller empire has enough fame stars to catch up with the larger empire in the late game, then it will become a tight race for who will get the most fame at the end of the game. At least in theory, and without consideration for any balance issues.
 
And then, following that logic, once you enter the late game, it's less a matter of who has the most territory and more of a matter of who gets the most fame out of conquering territory. If the smaller empire has enough fame stars to catch up with the larger empire in the late game, then it will become a tight race for who will get the most fame at the end of the game. At least in theory, and without consideration for any balance issues.

Since 'Fame' comes from various activities, including amassing Territory, Gold, Conquest, Science, etc, it would seem this will have two major effects:
1. You will have to work very hard to maintain the Lead in any single area, because your 'Base' from the previous Era will force you to accomplish more in that area for the same result that someone who was behind has to - the 'lead' is likely to go back and forth from Era to Era.
2. IF you are far behind in any one area, like, say, total number of territories/regions ('Wide'), you can potentially 'catch up' by achieving Fame in other areas, like Gold or Science or the amount of Quarters, Improvements and infrastructure within your fewer Regions.

What an absolutely Elegant way to keep the late game competitive and interesting!
 
Back
Top Bottom