Humankind Game by Amplitude

More:
  • War resolution screen needs some work, it is really hard to know what you are taking in the peace treaty.
  • Expansionist seems to the weakest affinity, the goal is actually even harder now since you no longer can spam many small cities and attachment have its own issues, meaning you will likely have to expansionst with war. The ability is hard to use. In the end in order to be expansionist you will likely gain asthete, merchant, militarist and scientist stars, I don't think any other affinity have a goal that is such interdependent on other affinity stars goals. Strongest affinity seems to be agriculture, additional population is simply so powerful, builder is perhaps somewhat better choice for fame due to easy goal.
  • District cost could need some rebalance, right now attached territories look pretty much like outposts, probably because exploiting land is weak compared to concentrating districts, especially maker's quarters get huge adjacency bonus. Hamlet cost should be reduced to be the same as a normal district, harbour cost could also be reduced.
  • Right now the majority of the territories will likely only be used for their resources (which are really powerful) and strategic positions. Attachment use is limited, it count towards era stars, block other players armies, have roads much earlier than outposts and allow you to build districts, mostly just things such as harbours and forts to help manage military, the administrative center is basically just a buffed hamlet. Drawbacks of attachment, include stability and influence cost. Atleast now you have the ability to turn attached territories back into outposts, allowing it to become a new city or be attached to a new city.
  • Warfare is maybe even more powerful now than it was before, being able to annex a city can save you thousands of influence on not having to found one yourself.
  • If you are willing to micromanage, it may be a good idea to attach/detach territories, build them up, then detach to reduce district cost and outpost for some reason can be good at growing population. The drawback is you may end up with alot of temporary useless districts and have to pay alot of influnce.
 
Boris Gudenuf said:
Early Harappans are potential Nasty: as soon as you progress to Ancient Era, all your Hunter-Gatherers automatically upgrade to Runners, which have a superior Combat Strength to ordinary Scouts. That means in the first turns of the Ancient Era, before your neighbors get the Tech to produce Archers and/or Warriors (and have the population to produce them, because it now costs city population to build units) the Harappans can Romp and Stomp if they have a mind to.

So may aspects to explore . . .
Click to expand...
The AI Harrappans actually did this to me, luckily I had got a warrior and was able to purchase a Javelin Thrower before the war went south but it ironically makes the historically peaceful culture the biggest threat right after that era turn
 
My impression after finishing a game.
definitively good improvement in the good direction:
  • Technology pace
  • UI when placing district clean and not confused like before
  • improvement on food utility
  • early game balancing on curiosities sanctuary and combat yields
there is some issues who needs to be adresse:
  • Pacing of era: star/culture card with technology is broken, i made 3 game(only one finished) and every game my era star is too fast compare to technology(i becam industrial germany when i just discover chivalry), it's not that impacting in term of gameplay but broke the immersion
  • Gold is KING: i made a game focused on gold and... it goes very very well, i could build a city and buy every infractructure and fill every tiles of the region in 3-4 turn just by buying everything(see image below to show the problem of cost vs income gold, i also choose carthage so be aware there is -50%).
  • Food become less and less useful: , reaching the "medieval era" there is not point of making more farmer district, making infrastructure that improve farming district/river tiles etc, is more than enough (and too much maybe)
  • battle placement: , seems sometimes buggy: i was sometime in a position where i could place my units on only one tile, and une one instance i was in a position where my archer could not be reach by the enemy because the terrain allocate for the combat did not allow to turn around the cliff, and since archer has a very good range, you guess what happen.
  • Diplomacy need more clarity, sometimes i did not realise that an AI was asking for something and... i may have them declare war on me because of that
  • Diplomacy vassalisation: is too strong and seems unpunishing, vassalising an AI early generate so much gold and it's easy, the Ai accept easily to become your vassal even if you just win some skirmishes and have a weak army barely able to defend your lands, and in bonus the AI will never ask to be free and will never ever attack you(and have numerous advantages trades etc...).
My suggestions:
  • Gold should not construct instantly district or infrastructures but rather lower the cost by half.
conclusion:
Despite some Issues this open dev is way more playable than the lucy open dev, the early game is the stronger part of the game, and i will definitively make more game.
Spoiler Image of gold is King :
upload_2021-4-23_14-4-2.png
 
Last edited:
Loaded up a second game, this time started as Egyptians and moved to Romans so far. I have a lot of praises for the war system and combat as of now:
  • Was on the receiving end of Olmec javelin throwers this game in a massive early game war and those suckers HURT even with only 2 range compared to an archer's 3.
  • On that note, the higher range and mobility of the Markabata is perfect for destroying these guys. Emblematic units really do matter if used well.
  • High ground isn't as stupidly OP as previous open devs but is still VERY important, as is tree cover. Selecting your battlefield and going first as attacker is important too. There are battles that look like you SHOULD win on paper as a defender, but if the right battlefield is selected, a smaller army can destroy a bigger army (realistically). Numbers alone are not going to let you win, and I appreciate that. The AI knows this well and the combat can be unforgiving at times. They are good at hunting for good terrain to use to their advantage and attack a larger army with a smaller one due to a superior unit type and better terrain.
  • Timing your own moves to avoid an enemy army is tricky, but done right can allow you to move just far enough away to exhaust them and then let you move back into range to attack on your own terms.
  • War Support - as an attacker, if you're declaring an "unjust war" then you have to fight the constant ticking down of your own war support. I was trying very hard to engage in whatever battles I could and ransack whatever possible to help my war support stay up against an enemy that had 100 war support. High war support makes wars last longer, and back and forth wars will likely last forever as to force a peace for terms you have to push enemy war support to 0. I love this mechanic because it feels realistic and organic, lets people have comebacks, and war feels like war instead of gamey.
  • It's interesting because early battles and skirmishes are not something to be shy of in the early game land grab. The AI is going to skirmish against your units if you don't have a Non-Aggression pact with them over outposts, so you need to do the same. Having a small force to deal with enemy scouts and ransack outposts is important, just be aware that it pushes up enemy war support against you (obviously).
  • High War Support gives you an advantage of dragging out the war, but does not make you impervious. An attacker (or defender) with lower war support and careful planning/tactics can push theirs up due to constant victories while simultaneously dragging down enemy war support. Just like life!
  • I do like that a peace deal, no matter what, exhausts both sides' desires to return to war with the other party - let's not do this again soon, they say. And it makes sense, the victor has no desire to go for more against an enemy they just crushed, and need to rebuild/consolidate, and the loser isn't in any state to fight again...yet.
I have had some weird issues where autoresolving battles sometimes makes my armies invisible or leaves a "battle" on the map that can't be interacted with. Reloading a save generally erases this issue but it is weird.

I don't really understand vassals and Religion still feels amorphous and impenetrable into how I get it, spread, etc. Same with cultural influence. I like these mechanics and I can see a lot of their effects, but it is still not all clear.

I'm kind of addicted and really am sad i can't play the full game yet. More feedback after more games.
 
I managed to reach industrial era ca turn 145, but once you do the game simply end, no era screen or whatever. To reach the industrial era before the end of the game I had to sacrifice alot of people to get two builder stars and go to war to get 1 militarist star.

Overall the pacing and ai seems alot better than it was during Lucy, however it feels there is alot of balancing issues.
  • Certain affinities are just better than others. Expansionist stars are simply too demanding, I would suggest outpost should be enough. In ancient era the first expansionist star require 5 territories that must either be cities or attached to cities, at the same time the first builder star require 6 districts, the gap between those two requirements are enormous. Expansionist ability is so hard to use it become basically useless. You can't use it on allies, including vassals and not on enemies. Outposts quickly disappear, meaning you are left trying to get open borders, I don't see how that would work in multiplayer. If you need to make the ability so hard to use, it is perhaps time to give expansionist another ability instead or give them open borders with everyone as a passive ability. Thus builder affinity is better in every way compared to expansionist.
  • Medieval unit cost progress seems very strange, the crossbow and pikemen cost 200 industry, longswordmen which is just one more tech cost 400 industry and knights cost 800 industry.
  • Infrastructure, some are very good, like the power line, others like the tax offices feels pretty much like a waste, I would suggest trying to get rid of all flat yield infrastructure and tie them into something like districts, terrain or population.
  • Repeatables cost too much for very minor bonuses, only one worthwhile is the faith one since faith dont have many sources.
  • Resources are really powerful and their ability to stack leads to enormous advantages for whoever can control them, I would suggest adding dimishing returns per resource stack, so the first 1 give 100%, second one 50% third one 25% and so on.
  • The war resolution screen is very hard to use, I would like a way to see what I'm taking.
  • Attached territories look very much like outpost, an administrative center, maybe an harbour and resource collection sities. District cost progression get really steep, I have seen harbours and hamlet cost 4000 industry while the basic districts cost 2000 industry and the fact the best way is to place districts next to each other lead to a few large cities and the rest of the map is just wasteland, no villages (hamlets) exist because they are simply too expensive. I would suggest either make hamlets cheaper or give them their own cost progression separate from the city districts.
 
Last edited:
Cat-du-fromage said:
I found even more powerful than gold! sacrifice citizen!!! you kill one citizen for one building, since the population recover very fast this is no big deal!
Click to expand...
It can be a big deal since you can end up permanently behind in population which can add up in alot of lost resources. But otherwise yes it is very powerful way to get alot of districts and thus quickly get builder stars.
 
Denkt said:
It can be a big deal since you can end up permanently behind in population which can add up in alot of lost resources. But otherwise yes it is very powerful way to get alot of districts and thus quickly get builder stars.
Click to expand...
Yep this, plus it’s a balancing act with your military and I imagine protracted wars, especially in future MP games will make population devastated (I love that as a limit and consideration)
 
Early Wars: What I Have Learned The Hard Way (in 4 'starts' played through the Ancient Era)

I repeat what I said in a previous post, Harappans are Dangerous. Their Runners magically upgrade from their Tribes at the start of the Ancient Era, and they have a nasty combat advantage against ordinary Scouts and with terrain, can hold their own even against Warriors. A Harappan Hustle (their version of a 'Rush') can put you on a back foot very fast.
Olmec javelins are the next worst thing to run into. As said, they pack a lot of punch if a shorter range, and they are potentially available with the first tech you research (Carpentry, available at the start of the Ancient Era with no prior Tech requirements). If your opponent has a Javeineer sitting on a hill - Leave Him Alone because you will pay dearly trying to get at him.
Next Bad Thing is Myceneans. Like the javelins, their Emblematic Promachoi are potentially available very early, and their initial charge is terrifying - one of them from a hilltop can turn a Scout into mincemeat and damage a Warrior so badly he is Road Kill in the next battle round.
Hittites get +1 Combat Factor across the board. This isn't quite as bad as it looks, because terrain gives more than that as an advantage, and Emblematic Units all seem to be +1 or more compared to their regular counterparts. It does mean that without Emblematics, don't try Hittites one on one - they will win unless you've suckered them into charging uphill.

Oh, and the AI knows all this: Harappans, Myceneans, and Olmecs were the first Factions chosen in the Ancient Era in every single game I played!
 
Boris Gudenuf said:
Early Wars: What I Have Learned The Hard Way (in 4 'starts' played through the Ancient Era)

I repeat what I said in a previous post, Harappans are Dangerous. Their Runners magically upgrade from their Tribes at the start of the Ancient Era, and they have a nasty combat advantage against ordinary Scouts and with terrain, can hold their own even against Warriors. A Harappan Hustle (their version of a 'Rush') can put you on a back foot very fast.
Olmec javelins are the next worst thing to run into. As said, they pack a lot of punch if a shorter range, and they are potentially available with the first tech you research (Carpentry, available at the start of the Ancient Era with no prior Tech requirements). If your opponent has a Javeineer sitting on a hill - Leave Him Alone because you will pay dearly trying to get at him.
Next Bad Thing is Myceneans. Like the javelins, their Emblematic Promachoi are potentially available very early, and their initial charge is terrifying - one of them from a hilltop can turn a Scout into mincemeat and damage a Warrior so badly he is Road Kill in the next battle round.
Hittites get +1 Combat Factor across the board. This isn't quite as bad as it looks, because terrain gives more than that as an advantage, and Emblematic Units all seem to be +1 or more compared to their regular counterparts. It does mean that without Emblematics, don't try Hittites one on one - they will win unless you've suckered them into charging uphill.

Oh, and the AI knows all this: Harappans, Myceneans, and Olmecs were the first Factions chosen in the Ancient Era in every single game I played!
Click to expand...
Early war is a challenge, and definitely a different challenge than Civ. A single Olmec Javelin Thrower in the right terrain can take on multiple units and it’s scary. I was at a huge disadvantage as Egypt until I got the Markabatas up and running (which turned the tide immensely and ended up being the perfect counter unit to those).

also unrelated, here’s what I’ll say about money. Even with such high money yields, with the insane amount of construction options you can always use more. Really so far i think the yields scale fairly well (though yes money is by far king, followed by population/food) and the factions scale well by era to compliment this.

Influence doesn’t scale the best and at a certain point stability seems to be a non-factor, especially in any city with later game wonders and certain religious beliefs. The commons quarter is also just kinda op to get stability in check so i never really had an issue with it past the earlier phases of the game.
 
Jkchart said:
Early war is a challenge, and definitely a different challenge than Civ. A single Olmec Javelin Thrower in the right terrain can take on multiple units and it’s scary. I was at a huge disadvantage as Egypt until I got the Markabatas up and running (which turned the tide immensely and ended up being the perfect counter unit to those).

also unrelated, here’s what I’ll say about money. Even with such high money yields, with the insane amount of construction options you can always use more. Really so far i think the yields scale fairly well (though yes money is by far king, followed by population/food) and the factions scale well by era to compliment this.

Influence doesn’t scale the best and at a certain point stability seems to be a non-factor, especially in any city with later game wonders and certain religious beliefs. The commons quarter is also just kinda op to get stability in check so i never really had an issue with it past the earlier phases of the game.
Click to expand...

As I said in another post, Influence and Stability both seem to primarily be Early Game Limiters to keep you from spamming territory grabs and cities: early growth takes some very definite planning because you don't have the Influence and/or Stability to do everything you want until about half-way through the game (late Medieval Era). Between Religious tenets that give Influence per Population, and Commons Quarters and Forts giving Stability, you can build your way out of Stability and Influence limitations pretty quickly once you get rolling.
 
Once you get the religion and some of the civcs, your influence rate should be enough to get two or 3 cities going. I would suggest staying in neolithic for 10 population so you instantly get a religion, population growth seems to be faster under neolithic. I have also been told that outpost are cheaper in neolithic. The ai will probably not punish you for staying long in neolithic and I also see the ai do the same.
 
Denkt said:
Once you get the religion and some of the civcs, your influence rate should be enough to get two or 3 cities going. I would suggest staying in neolithic for 10 population so you instantly get a religion, population growth seems to be faster under neolithic. I have also been told that outpost are cheaper in neolithic. The ai will probably not punish you for staying long in neolithic and I also see the ai do the same.
Click to expand...

Humankind is full of nice Trade Offs in which whatever decision you make could be right or wrong depending on your situation. How long you stay in the Neolithic is one of them. On the one hand, staying longer can allow you to 'jump start' religion, outposts, cities. On the other hand, you may find yourself squeezed between Harappans, Olmecs and Hittites and two of them building Emblematic Units before you can finish researching your first technology!

Glad you mentioned it, though, because I have also already (in just 3 games) seen an announcement that some AI Faction had just entered the Ancient Era 15 or more turns after I and all my AI neighbors had entered the Ancient Era.
Whether that was a 'choice' or not I am not certain, because in one game I kept one of my AI neighbors from leaving the Neolithic by slaughtering his Tribesmen wherever I found them (this is not a particularly good strategy, by the way - I should have spent more time developing my own Faction rather than hamstringing his) so that it was half-way through everybody else's Ancient Era before he got his first city started and he was dead last in Fame for the rest of the game - he had retreated to the far side of another Faction who wouldn't go Open Borders, so I never actually saw what his city and territory looked like.
 
I just got out of a long epic battle with Mexicans - yes AI can choose Industrial culture. Man, oh man. There was like 50 units on that battlefield, their keep on coming. Both sides full with arquebusiers, halbardiers and musketeers, sadly no mortar. Unfortunately battle was not resolved, because of a turn 150 limit, but that was some amazing combat, and the battlefield was perfect - two mountain ranges with a vast plains in between. Sweet.
 
More notes after 3 games:

The era stars vs tech pace need huge adjustment. Tech moves at an appropriate pace now, but it's too easy to get your fifth culture before you've even finished half of the tech tree. Each of the era stars are as follows:
  • Aesthete: generate influence over time
  • Agrarian: have more pops and units
  • Builder: have more districts
  • Expansionist: attach territories to cities
  • Merchant: make money over time
  • Militarist: kill more units
  • Science: get more technologies
Builder, for example, is stupidly easy for anyone to fulfill all three era star requirements relatively quickly, especially if they are a big money maker. Expansionist is far harder even with a high influence generation rate. Some of these thresholds really need to be higher to slow down culture progression and to also make each era star type a bit more competitive. I pity those who like expansionism for example.

For example, perhaps for builder it should be for districts constructed instead of bought, to reward actual builders with high industry. It is both immersion breaking and can lead to (for example) some quick obsolecenses with the ability to build desirable quarters as well as unique units.
 
With all contemporary era cultures leaked, it seems clear who‘ll be the mysterious agrarian civ:
Spoiler :
Egypt
 
Siptah said:
With all contemporary era cultures leaked, it seems clear who‘ll be the mysterious agrarian civ:
Spoiler :
Egypt
Click to expand...
That is not the leak I am aware of. Could you tell me more?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bonyduck Campersang
Liegecraft - A New 4X Game in Development
Replies
5
Views
2K
Bonyduck Campersang
Bonyduck Campersang
GeneralZift
CCS: Alternate Victory Conditions
Replies
0
Views
252
GeneralZift
GeneralZift
evonannoredars
How will nukes come into play?
Replies
8
Views
2K
SirViss
SirViss
Catoninetales_Amplitude
The Future of in-game events
Replies
0
Views
1K
Catoninetales_Amplitude
Catoninetales_Amplitude
Saxo Grammaticus
Returning from Civ V to Humankind
Replies
11
Views
6K
Lazy sweeper
Lazy sweeper
Back
Top Bottom