Humankind Game by Amplitude

[Trav'ling Canuck]

What I am afraid of with the changing culture is that the competitors will be less personnable.

Now in civ, if I spawn next to Monty now what to expect, and I can build a relationship throughout the game and even over my entire civ experience. In this setting, if my neighbor is China for a while and suddenly becomes industrial germany, how can I maintain a continuity of the relationship? Will they be the red player? And can multiple player chose the same culture?

This is a concern for me, too. Although I like the suggestion above by @Boris Gudenuf that this personality could come through in other ways, including the behaviour of their emissaries/diplomats (and no, at this point, we don't even know if there will be emissaries or diplomats).

Bottom line, I think, is that Amplitude will have to do one of three things:
a) Not have AI civs convey unique personalities (a bad thing to my mind, and inconsistent with their approach to their Endless games);
b) Have a personality tied to each historical civ, such that the behaviour of your AI neighbours change each era (probably fairly historical, but a change from what we're used to in Civ); or,
c) Look for a different way to convey these personalities such there this is some continuity over time, but it's not tied to an immortal leader.

Fyi re your question about multiple players choosing the same culture: no, it sounds like on when you enter a new era, you choose from the remaining available civs for that era, and cannot choose one tht is already taken. This also suggests that not every player will enter each new era at the same time.

 

[Gorbles]

Something akin to how SMAC did it would work very well (though knowing Amplitude, with a bunch more to it). Leader personalities and leader agendas were very different (which is what made randomising them in the game options so fun). I like how Civ 6 models it within the context of Civ 6 (where agendas are a lot more mechanical), but Humankind has the potential to "SMAC it up" (my phrase, patent pending) by using this kind of thing for aesthetic character, more than gameplay rules.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

On the other hand, Amplitude/Sega may also have their eyes on the Civ model of expansions/DLCs. If we see noticeable geographic clusters of selected civs together with noticeably light/absent representation from other areas, that may not be the intended end state, but potentially a starting point for HK.

Amplitude already uses that model with the Endless series, that's all but guaranteed here.

That's good to hear. I don't have any experience with this studio to know what they do in terms of content and with the large number of 60, already, I wasn't sure if they would go that route.

b) Have a personality tied to each historical civ, such that the behaviour of your AI neighbours change each era (probably fairly historical, but a change from what we're used to in Civ); or,

From one of the screenshot you can see that Babylon was deemed scientific, so I think it might be safe to say that if Babylon is a AI player they would try to go for technologies and maybe that Ai player will try to go for cultures that are technology based in later periods. Or they decide it's not working out and switch to something more feasible.
I wonder if the same 10 traits might be seen across every era as in agriculture, builder, scientific, militaristic etc.?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I'm thinking the sword/science/builder/food icons represent the ways that that civ gains extra Fame. Like, a Wonder may provide more Fame to a builder civ than a swords civ.

I suddenly realized that HK reminds me of a boardgame I have called SmallWorld. Everyone picks a fantasy race and sets out to claim or conquer territory. But each race has a finite amount of tokens to expend in this endeavor, and you reach an inflection point where it becomes expedient to switch to a new race and infuse your conquests with new tokens. But each race has slightly different rule sets which change things up.

 

[Casworon]

The smallworld comparison works.

In terms of AI behaviour, if each culture earns fame in different ways then i imagine the behaviour of the AI will change depending on what culture they pick. Changing their priorities to whatever earns fame with their current culture pick. So you could have the same AI 'civ' changing behaviour massively every era

Though tbh i imagine the AI is going to be sub par. This is a 4x game after all

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

In terms of AI behaviour, if each culture earns fame in different ways then i imagine the behaviour of the AI will change depending on what culture they pick. Changing their priorities to whatever earns fame with their current culture pick. So you could have the same AI 'civ' changing behaviour massively every era

One day you have peaceful farmers on the other side of the water from you, the next thing you know, they're Vikings. One day the deserts to your east are inhabited by peaceful traders, the next they're spreading their culture to you at the edge of a sword.

It's a big change from Civ, but I could see it working. Entering every new era isn't just about "how am I changing?" but also "how have my neighbours changed?"

 

[Zaarin]

I'm very interested in the new game but I have some reservations (as alluded to some pages ago). Will the game focus too much on warfare, ie does all city building only help warfare in the end? I don't hope so.

This has not been the case in any of Amplitude's previous titles.

FlybyNo is at the reins for Humankind's soundtrack.

But i doubt its going to follow the civ tradition of each civilisation having its own soundtrack.

In Amplitude's prior titles, each civ had a single track associated with them, but I don't think the Endless games can really be a predictive model for how Humankind will handle civs: Amplitude's MO up until now has been small civ rosters of very unique civilizations. That's clearly not the case in Humankind...

What I am afraid of with the changing culture is that the competitors will be less personnable.

This is my greatest concern as well.

One day the deserts to your east are inhabited by peaceful traders, the next they're spreading their culture to you at the edge of a sword.

The Byzantines in the 7th century AD say, "Tell me about it."

 

[SammyKhalifa]

This is a concern for me, too. Although I like the suggestion above by @Boris Gudenuf that this personality could come through in other ways, including the behaviour of their emissaries/diplomats (and no, at this point, we don't even know if there will be emissaries or diplomats).

Bottom line, I think, is that Amplitude will have to do one of three things:
a) Not have AI civs convey unique personalities (a bad thing to my mind, and inconsistent with their approach to their Endless games);
b) Have a personality tied to each historical civ, such that the behaviour of your AI neighbours change each era (probably fairly historical, but a change from what we're used to in Civ); or,
c) Look for a different way to convey these personalities such there this is some continuity over time, but it's not tied to an immortal leader.

Fyi re your question about multiple players choosing the same culture: no, it sounds like on when you enter a new era, you choose from the remaining available civs for that era, and cannot choose one tht is already taken. This also suggests that not every player will enter each new era at the same time.

Yeah, I get and like that you build your "civ" by choosing traits through the ages (would like it even more if your traits changed based on what you did). But I wonder if the whole thing will feel disjointed if you playing as the Harappans then Greece then Azetc then China then Greece again.

Even in Smallworld, although the "tribes" play (and are going against) differ through the game, the "leaders" are still the same giving the game some consistency and flow.

 

[qadams]

These concerns about fixed vs. changing identity don't bother me too much at this point. I think that's because a) I tend to play games like this more as a game rather than as a historical role play; and b) it seems no weirder than having a single immortal leader lasting thousands of years.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Here is a very good article that explains a lot.

https://twinfinite.net/2019/08/humankind-preview-sega/

As a Neo Tribe, you collect both Wisdom and Food in order to turn into BA civ. Wisdom is that screen with the three options of bonuses once settled. Food gives you a bigger population when settled or you can split the tribe and settle two cities. Based on the screenshot in the article, you need 5 of one and 4 of the other to enter the Bronze Age.

It also said the Ming were Renaissance, which makes more sense.

It says that only one player can pick a civ at a time.

It talks about Transcendence and Fame.

Terrain and cover affect combat.

It also mentions Emblematic Buildings which now makes me think that Wonders are exclusive to the civ. After all, lots of articles said Egypt builds pyramids. In my Civ-oriented brain, I didn't think that meant the big Pyramid Wonder, but maybe it is. If this is the case, there are some interesting implications based on what was in the trailer. Dev confirmed: emblematic buildings are not wonders.

You can only have one city per region. You can use units to create outposts in other regions to claim them. Outposts eventually turn into cities or conglomerate with existing adjacent cities to create metropolises.

The tech tree unlocks units and additional tile yields. Perhaps buildings are unlocked by the Age?

Thank you very much, @Eagle Pursuit, for posting this!

One caution for all of us, though: be careful not to try to stuff Humankind into CivVI definitions. An 'Emblematic Building' might seem to be similar to a Civ Wonder or National Wonder, but it doesn't have to have any of the Civ restrictions into categories like Improvements, Buildings, Wonders or Districts.

So, for instance, an Emblematic Building for Egypt might be a Pyramid (tomb) which is built in the Region but not in the city (as in IRL), while a Pyramid (temple) ala Aztecs, Mayans or Olmecs Must be built in the center of the city as a center for religious practices. An Agora or Forum Emblematic Building combining commercial, religious and political features must be built in the middle of a Greek or Roman city, respectively, but a stone circle/standing stone/Stonehenge doesn't have to be built anywhere near a city (but, as far as we can tell, would probably have to be built in a Region in which you have some kind of presence already).
In fact, a structure like a Kurgan or Stonehenge might be buildable before you've built any cities: Emblematic structures built (with some effort) while you are still a 'wandering tribe'. Gobekla Tepe anyone?

As the Developers have already stated, by 'starting fresh' they are not constrained by the Conventions of Civ or the categories into which Civ necessarily places constructions of all kinds.

And for those who read my earlier post about Emissaries or Diplomats, imagine a Diplomat looking suspiciously like Daffy Duck in a frock coat who pops up, after you've done something particularly obnoxious to their Civ, glares at you and says:

"You're Deshpicable!"

They'd probably run into all kinds of Trademark/Copyright problems, but I'd Kill for that game . . .

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

And for those who read my earlier post about Emissaries or Diplomats, imagine a Diplomat looking suspiciously like Daffy Duck in a frock coat who pops up, after you've done something particularly obnoxious to their Civ, glares at you and says:

"You're Deshpicable!"

But would it be an historically accurate frock coat for that era, or would the art team goof up and use an anachronistic cut of the labels? And if they do, how many pages of posts will that thread generate??

 

[bbbt]

This has not been the case in any of Amplitude's previous titles.

I'd sort of disagree, at least for endless legend (the only one I've played). It very much felt like a warfare/conquest was the primary and all the peaceful victories were sort of tacked on generic bucket fills. It was one of my major complaints about the game (basically for peaceful play I found Civ much more engaging and for conquest play there's a number of other games - Age of Wonders for example - I found better).

I don't think that will be the case with this one though with the fame points mechanic as victory condition, allowing a lot more variety.

I'm getting more optimistic about humankind despite my dislike of endless legend, as I think some of bigger complaints about that one may be mitigated in this.

And I actually like the idea of combining cultures - ala my previous comment, I totally built a multi style palace in Civ 3.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

I'm getting more optimistic about humankind

Ha! That makes one of us.


Oh, you mean the game . . .

 

[Zaarin]

I'd sort of disagree, at least for endless legend (the only one I've played). It very much felt like a warfare/conquest was the primary and all the peaceful victories were sort of tacked on generic bucket fills.

I've played exactly one game of Endless Legends and it was as the faction that can force peace. But in my many, many games of Endless Space and Endless Space 2 I've never been to war except for a single game in Endless Space 2 where I was playing as the Hissho, whose core resource is generated chiefly by battle.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

But would it be an historically accurate frock coat for that era, or would the art team goof up and use an anachronistic cut of the labels? And if they do, how many pages of posts will that thread generate??

Thufferin' Thuckitath! I thood have thought of that!

 

[kaspergm]

I'm not sure how I have not seen the contents of this thread before, but this game looks awesome. The combat sounds like exactly what I have been wishing for a new civ game. The game also sounds like it has much more variability than civ6 has.

 

[j51]

I think both Wendy Carlos and Patrick Gleason are available.

...And now I'm looking up who Patrick Gleason is and thinking "Oh man I gotta hear his take on The Planets NOW."

 

[Horizons]

It looks a bit contrived/SimCity-esque.

 

[tedhebert]

Here is a very good article that explains a lot.

https://twinfinite.net/2019/08/humankind-preview-sega/

It says that only one player can pick a civ at a time.

You can only have one city per region. You can use units to create outposts in other regions to claim them. Outposts eventually turn into cities or conglomerate with existing adjacent cities to create metropolises.

Thx @Eagle Pursuit for this...

2 points stand out for me:

1) IF only one player can pick a specific civ at a time, I'm concerned that this will become, for many players, a race to get 'this' civ or 'that' one... If the race is REALLY directed by gameplay and map, I'm good with that, but if it's relatively static, then most will wish for the same 1-2 civs at every age, and it'll become a boring race to sameness...

2) This region and outpost stuff really reminds me of how it works in Endless Space 2... You HAVE to create an outpost first, and then, when a certain amount of time (directed by resources needed) is achieved, THEN you can turn it into a city (or colonize a planet in ES2); Also, someone else can create an outpost on the region, so you can be beaten to the finish line there... and once a planet IS colonized, then NO ONE else can colonize the sector ! You must conquer ! Wonder if they're planning to go with the same method here... How would you feel about NOT being sure you'll be the first civ to have it's outpost become solid enough to be the one allowed to create a city in a zone ??? if makes life interesting to say the least ;-)

 

[_ViKinG_]

Any info on how the map is? Is it like civ one big map ? I hope it's an earth map