Humankind Game by Amplitude

[Uberfrog]

Celts seems like a solid choice...unless they play a switcheroo and actually go for Gauls.

Gauls are my #3 pick in any case

I hope they use a more specific name than “Celts”.

 

[Jkchart]

I believe Celts is more than solid, a safe choice. I remember in the twich presentation at the 2019 PAX west they introduced a quest about druids where one of the possible outcomes could only be selected if you were playing with the Celts.

Although I too would prefer the Gauls, I'm fine with Celts since they are doing "cultures", and Celts can be the ancestors a number of cultures that lead to cultures in the next eras. It's a nice broad catch all for now that leads historically to France, England, Scotland, etc. Not perfect, but I won't complain too much.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Although I too would prefer the Gauls, I'm fine with Celts since they are doing "cultures", and Celts can be the ancestors a number of cultures that lead to cultures in the next eras. It's a nice broad catch all for now that leads historically to France, England, Scotland, etc. Not perfect, but I won't complain too much.

While in the base game they appear to be trying to give the broadest possible choices in each Era, so you won't (probably) get more than 1 - 2 choices in any given World Region, they could easily produce a Celtic DLC/Add On to the game in which, after Celts in the Classical Era, you have a choice of Irish, Picts, or Dal Riada Scots in the Medieval Era, each with a different 'direction' from the original Celtic - whatever direction that is. Since the Celtic groups all over Europe had agriculture, advanced iron-working (invented both the pattern-welded sword and link mail armor and the earliest iron plows) and were starting to build cities connected by good roads when Caesar cut their development short, they could be Builders, Agrarians, or even Expansionist.

 

[Jkchart]

While in the base game they appear to be trying to give the broadest possible choices in each Era, so you won't (probably) get more than 1 - 2 choices in any given World Region, they could easily produce a Celtic DLC/Add On to the game in which, after Celts in the Classical Era, you have a choice of Irish, Picts, or Dal Riada Scots in the Medieval Era, each with a different 'direction' from the original Celtic - whatever direction that is. Since the Celtic groups all over Europe had agriculture, advanced iron-working (invented both the pattern-welded sword and link mail armor and the earliest iron plows) and were starting to build cities connected by good roads when Caesar cut their development short, they could be Builders, Agrarians, or even Expansionist.

I'm excited to see the direction they take the Celts in, to say the least. It'll be a bit sad if they are Militarists though.

 

[FinalDoomsday]

I'm excited to see the direction they take the Celts in, to say the least. It'll be a bit sad if they are Militarists though.

I think Agrarian is a good fit for them are there any other classical civs that would fit Agrarian just as well or better? Ptolemy's Egypt is the only one that comes to mind for me.

 

[Jkchart]

I think Agrarian is a good fit for them are there any other classical civs that would fit Agrarian just as well or better? Ptolemy's Egypt is the only one that comes to mind for me.

I think Agrarian is an excellent choice for the Celts.

If they did the Sabaean kingdom in Arabia, I'd also pull for them to be Agrarian perhaps (or merchant).

 

[conorbebe]

Just to give my two cents, I don't have a problem with Carthage having war elephants. When I think of the Punic Wars and Hannibal Barca, the image of African elephants crossing the Alps springs to mind. If that isn't emblematic, I don't know what is.

As for other cultures, I can see the classical or medieval representative for India (so Maurya/Gupta/other) getting the "Elephant Archer", and the Khmer getting their iconic "Ballista Elephant".

I don't see Persia getting elephants, and considering they got theirs from India anyway, I don't think it would be fitting either. I predict cataphracts or Immortals.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Just to give my two cents, I don't have a problem with Carthage having war elephants. When I think of the Punic Wars and Hannibal Barca, the image of African elephants crossing the Alps springs to mind. If that isn't emblematic, I don't know what is.

Just to point out, while the Punic Pachyderms spring to mind as imagery, most of Hannibal's elephants didn;t make it through the Alps alive, and the elephants failed him badly at Zama. The historically iconic Carthaginian military Unit was the Numidian, Gaulic or Spanish (Celtiberian) Mercenary: unlike everybody else, they essentially Bought their entire army under Hannibal.

As for other cultures, I can see the classical or medieval representative for India (so Maurya/Gupta/other) getting the "Elephant Archer", and the Khmer getting their iconic "Ballista Elephant".

- And, possibly, the Mughuls getting Armored Elephants, the classical Burmese getting elephants, the Siamese (Medieval-Renaissance) getting Elephants - no shortage of Potential In-Game Elephants . . .

I don't see Persia getting elephants, and considering they got theirs from India anyway, I don't think it would be fitting either. I predict cataphracts or Immortals.

Absolutely. Persian Armies were always heavy on cavalry, and elephants and horses do not mix well unless they are raised and trained together. At Gaugamela, Darius had 15 elephants, all of which were left with the baggage train, because only 1000 Indian cavalry in his front line of 36,000 other cavalry were used to elephants - putting them in the battle would have disrupted his entire army!

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Remember, they're Emblematic Units, not Unique Units. They're what people think of when they think of that culture, to the extent that people may think of that culture's military achievements.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Remember, they're Emblematic Units, not Unique Units. They're what people think of when they think of that culture, to the extent that people may think of that culture's military achievements.

Which is, however, a little disingenuous. On the one hand, they are going to give us units that are 'Emblematic' of the various Factions. On the other hand, they are giving us Promachoi for the Myceneans, a word used to describe elements of the Greek military from Homer's Heroes to Alexander the Great's Pezhetairoi (phalanx) and which only a few Classicists and Greek linguists (and ancient Greek linguists, at that) are going to recognize. On the other hand, they have "Harappan Runners" which are completely made up: we don't have a clue what any Harappan military unit was or might have been called. We're pretty sure they did not have chariots or elephants, and that just about sums up our knowledge of them.

So, please, Emblematic is not entirely accurate.

Furthermore, while both Humankind and Civilization try to educate the gamer regarding some pretty obscure Leaders and Factions/Civilizations (like Civ VI's Scythians, who again are known mostly to Classicists, or the above-mentioned Harappans), both take 'the easy way out' when it comes to Units and give us Pop Culture instead of real military history - like Carthaginian elephants instead of their characteristic (and successful) Mercenaries, or Viking/Norse Berserkers instead of the well-equipped Jarls and their followers who were the real power in any Viking host.

IF they are going to do a Historical 4X Game, then get the history right, or as close to right as is consistent with a playable game. That especially includes the military history, but of course that's my personal bias because I Я A Military Historian

But I suspect some of you have already figured that out . . .

 

[Siptah]

Gauls are my #3 pick in any case

I hope they use a more specific name than “Celts”.

I hope for a different name as well. Especially since, as someone who is more into archeology than into languages, I was always disappointed that the celts in civ were so British oriented. Archeologically speaking, the Iron Age Population of the British isles were not celts, just heavily influenced by them. So here we have the chance to get a Celtic culture that is based on the Gauls, Hallstatt or La Tène cultures, which is probably the closest you can get to the Celtic heartland. We saw the name celts in apparently outdated screenshots last year. Let‘s hope it got changed since then.

 

[FinalDoomsday]

@Boris Gudenuf I agree the mercenary soldiers are emblematic of Carthage at war but the two problems that come to mind with using 'Numidian Cavalry', 'Celtiberian Warrior' or any other mercenary is first there is a possibility those cultures might turn up themselves when Carthage has already pinched their most iconic soldier although I'll admit I'd be pleasantly surprised if Numidia turned up at some point.

Second there might already be a mercenary system in the game, Endless Legend and Endless Space 2 both had mercenary systems as I'm sure you know from playing Roving Clans. If this is the case it might be a little awkward and confusing if Carthage had a mercenary unit that is not considered a mercenary by the game rules. However if there is a mercenary system its entirely possible you will be able to play as Carthage in an accurate manner spending vast sums of money (which as a merchant civ they should be good at) to raise a large army of assorted mercenaries.

It would be very cool if other civs emblematic units could turn up as mercenaries or unique units that only turn up as mercenaries.

I also agree that more accurate emblematic units and districts would be better but I'm pretty much resigned to Vikings getting a Berserker unit... (Can we blame Age Of Empires 2 for a lot of this?)

 

[ehecatzin]

I wouldn't be surprised if the Cothon gave Carthage discounts to mercenary units along with whatever bonus to ships or trade it has. if you go Phoencia - Carthage you should be generating a lot of Gold to sustain a large military....sort of like the Broken lords.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

@Boris Gudenuf I agree the mercenary soldiers are emblematic of Carthage at war but the two problems that come to mind with using 'Numidian Cavalry', 'Celtiberian Warrior' or any other mercenary is first there is a possibility those cultures might turn up themselves when Carthage has already pinched their most iconic soldier although I'll admit I'd be pleasantly surprised if Numidia turned up at some point.

Second there might already be a mercenary system in the game, Endless Legend and Endless Space 2 both had mercenary systems as I'm sure you know from playing Roving Clans. If this is the case it might be a little awkward and confusing if Carthage had a mercenary unit that is not considered a mercenary by the game rules. However if there is a mercenary system its entirely possible you will be able to play as Carthage in an accurate manner spending vast sums of money (which as a merchant civ they should be good at) to raise a large army of assorted mercenaries.

It would be very cool if other civs emblematic units could turn up as mercenaries or unique units that only turn up as mercenaries.

I also agree that more accurate emblematic units and districts would be better but I'm pretty much resigned to Vikings getting a Berserker unit... (Can we blame Age Of Empires 2 for a lot of this?)

Absolutely agree that there should be a Mercenary System in the game, because Hiring From Without was too important to too many military systems in history, not least Roman, Chinese, Greek, and almost all the states of the 17th and 18th centuries in Europe! Famously, it was said then that each Mercenary was actually worth Three Men: one new soldier for you, one less soldier that could be hired by your enemy, and one more civilian of yours who could stay home, work, and pay taxes to support the mercenaries.

Within the context of a good, workable Mercenary Mechanic, Carthage could find it easier to hire mercenaries, could (possibly) hire troop-types from both major and minor Factions (apparently, the City States or Barbarians of Humankind, or maybe both in some form) or be the only Faction that can hire Emblematic Units. Lots of possibilities.

"Purely" Mercenary Units, or units which as Mercenaries get a slightly different effect, would also be absolutely worthwhile.
For example, Friedrich of Prussia couldn't trust his soldiers without tight supervision (desertion was endemic in the Prussian Army) so all Pillaging and Foraging for Food from the countryside was done by mercenary light troops or cavalry.
The Hypaspists, medium infantry under Alexander, became a mercenary unit under the Successor States called the Argyaspides or "Sliver Shields" who were an elite pike phalanx.

Again, lots of possibilities to add flavor to the game.

I'm not sure that we could blame Berserkers on any particular game. They have fascinated pseudo-historians forever, in books, movies, and all kinds of popular entertainment. Simply effective and dangerous troops don't get the publicity that Crazed Nutters chewing on their beards get.

Bernard Cornwell's "Saxon Stories" are a much better depiction of Viking and in general, "Dark Age" warfare in England/Britain, and if you can find a copy, Frans G. Bengtsson's Red Orm (also released as The Long Ships) is a novel that catches the very thought processes of the Viking World beautifully - Bengtsson was a Swedish historian and military historian who brought a mass of accurate background to his only novel.

 

[shaglio]

I'm not sure that we could blame Berserkers on any particular game. They have fascinated pseudo-historians forever, in books, movies, and all kinds of popular entertainment. Simply effective and dangerous troops don't get the publicity that Crazed Nutters chewing on their beards get.

Bernard Cornwell's "Saxon Stories" are a much better depiction of Viking and in general, "Dark Age" warfare in England/Britain, and if you can find a copy, Frans G. Bengtsson's Red Orm (also released as The Long Ships) is a novel that catches the very thought processes of the Viking World beautifully - Bengtsson was a Swedish historian and military historian who brought a mass of accurate background to his only novel.

I'm sure Eater's of the Dead/The 13th Warrior isn't even remotely accurate. But I certainly enjoyed the book & movie.

 

[Ziad]

Aw yeah Carthaginians!

I'm ready for my naval empire.

 

[Siptah]

We could also consider them focusing on a specific tribe that would allow them to further expand them down the road as opposed to just using Celts as an all encompassing term.

-Helveti
-Iceni (I think this could be another option moar war carts)
-Nervii
-Veneti (not gonna lie I'd love it just for the Asterix vibes.)

Hm... I think specific tribes are a bit unlikely as they are so specific and not a culture by themselves, right?

Gauls, (Celt-)Iberians, Germanic People, I could have seen that. Nervii or Helveti? Seems to narrow, and we might not even see Belgium or Switzerland later on.

Maybe there is no inner-European Iron Age civ besides the Goths. Together with Rome and Greece, it makes the Classic Era European enough already. Wrong thread to speculate anyway ;-)

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Let's see, how to smuggle 'Celts' into an alphabetic Faction List for the Classical Era of Humankind, when they seem to have already skipped past both Celts and Gauls as Faction Titles.

1. The center of the Celtic cultural realm in Europe was the Halstatt Culture of 800 - 450 BCE (approximately): Call them the Halstatt Culture, which would confuse the H**l out of most gamers but actually be as accurate as any other title for them.
2. Halstatt was followed by the La Tene Culture (450 BCE to Roman Contact), one center of which was around Paris, so La Tene Culture would be another confusing, but perfectly accurate title.
3. 'Re-spell' them - call them the Kelts
4. Among the separate Celtic 'tribes' that could be used to complete the stupefaction of the Gaming Public are:
Tectosages
Senones
Venetii
Parisii
Pictones
Sequanes
Helvetii
Treveri
Volcae
BUT some of these are off in southern Germany and central Europe, so really don't apply to the center of the 'Celtic Realm'.

I really, really want a Celtic faction in the game. If they aren't going to include it in the Release Game, I hope somebody Mods it in As Soon As Possible . . .

 

[Jkchart]

Let's see, how to smuggle 'Celts' into an alphabetic Faction List for the Classical Era of Humankind, when they seem to have already skipped past both Celts and Gauls as Faction Titles.

1. The center of the Celtic cultural realm in Europe was the Halstatt Culture of 800 - 450 BCE (approximately): Call them the Halstatt Culture, which would confuse the H**l out of most gamers but actually be as accurate as any other title for them.
2. Halstatt was followed by the La Tene Culture (450 BCE to Roman Contact), one center of which was around Paris, so La Tene Culture would be another confusing, but perfectly accurate title.
3. 'Re-spell' them - call them the Kelts
4. Among the separate Celtic 'tribes' that could be used to complete the stupefaction of the Gaming Public are:
Tectosages
Senones
Venetii
Parisii
Pictones
Sequanes
Helvetii
Treveri
Volcae
BUT some of these are off in southern Germany and central Europe, so really don't apply to the center of the 'Celtic Realm'.

I really, really want a Celtic faction in the game. If they aren't going to include it in the Release Game, I hope somebody Mods it in As Soon As Possible . . .

Someone has suggested the Picts showing up as an Iron age Celtic/British faction, which is possible

 

[Matthias Corvinus]

Perhaps the Franks are being represented instead of something entirely Celtic.