Discussion in 'Humankind by Amplitude' started by AtlantisAuthor, Aug 19, 2019.
That's actually adorable - I love it!
I expect it'll be something you can turn off.
On the Biggest Fears thread, scratch off "Boring graphics".
Not necessarily. Most of the animal Resource tiles and the majority of the Improvements in Civ VI are animated to some degree, so it's entirely possible that Humankind will not be much more Graphic-Intensive than Civ VI is now. A lot depends on the size of maps provided and therefore the sheer number of animations required, and, frankly, the degree of proficiency in programming them. A little 'elegance' in programming goes a long way when multiplied by several hundred tiles!
I'm wondering what news we'll see this week.
The Khmer on Tuesday seem likely.
The last dev diary video was uploaded roughly a month ago. I expected a video two weeks ago, but it was not revealed. Last week, there was a holiday and bridge in France, so that might be why we did not see a new video released on Thursday or Friday.
So I wondered if we'll get a video this week or even more than that (hope dies last).
Or is the "silence" - there still is activity on twitter - because the teased immersive sound video has some problems (due to wfh?)?
Imgur album updated to include the Khmer:
As I was saving the picture from the Twitter account, I come across a reply that asked when the Arabs are going to be announced in the game. Do you think we're going to have the Umayyads, or the Abbassids but they'll come in later?
Looks like we'll finally get a glimpse at real gameplay next month. Hands-on Impressions on the 9th of June and then a Gameplay Interview (commented gameplay?) on the 11th.
But eu4 Emperor releases on that day... argh!
Wasn't 13 Sentinels: Aegis Rim revealed five or six years ago?
Due to the nature of the game, city name lists of cultures may greatly overlap. For example: Mycenae, Greeks, Byzantines, Romans all have many overlapping names. Let's imagine a situation when I take Mycenae, in classical age I do still have them while two other AIs take Rome and Greece, and in the medieval era another AIs takes Byzantium. Oh and many Roman city names overlap with Frankish as well. And let's assume all those four spam many cities in such situation. Did you made such creative city name lists that this problem doesn't happen at all, they all have different city names, or do you have some mechanisms to help here?
Other intriguing examples of overlapping city names:
- Franks, Romans, Germans and French, each held by separate player in the same time
- Anglo Saxons and English existing in the same time by separate players
- Islamic cultures of the Middle East, who gets Baghdad/Damascus/Aleppo/Jerusalem/Cairo/or even Mecca : o
- Zhou, Ming and PRC (this is the best example probably)
If city lists are extensive enough, an overlap is no problem at all. The game just needs to check when founding if a city with this name already exists on the map. The PRC can include all of Zhou and Ming cities that still exist today, but hopefully it is not the other way round as well and Zhou only found cities of their time.
It's not even a problem when razed/renamed cities are not taken into account, as there is historical precedence for that (e.g. Bern was founded and named when Verona, whose German name was Bern, left the Empire).
I for one also don't have a problem with the same city being on the map under different names - as long as they are different enough, like for the Ottomans and Byzantines or Egypt and Arabia.
There are situations when it is really hard to avoid, such as with Rome (would you prefer to exclude it from Roman or Italian civ?), Moscow (do you take it away from 17th century Russia or Soviet?), or numerous very different Islamic civilizations which all used Arabic language and covered similar areas, with the exact same main cities.
You simply can't take, for example, two Islamic civilizations from Egypt and don't give freakin Cairo to one of them and instead some random obscure town.
Or what if you'd like to have several incarnations of France, Germany and England? Who gets Paris and London and who gets some obscure town instead, from "extensive city lists"?
We get several Chinese civilizations in the game, but cities such as Beijing and Nankin were absolutely crucial to many Chinese civilizations for many centuries, under the same names.
That's not that easy question, you can't always handwave it with "extensive city lists", that's why I am asking about tu - its interesting
And remember, the situation is differented from civ. In civ there are a lot of civs (much more than actual number of player slots in a game) which are mostly singular and general in nature, so there is a small chance there will be any two conflicting name lists in one game. In Humankind you are (unless AI players are destroyed completely) very likely to get China 1, then second player with China 2, and then third player with China 3, as there are very few civs choosable per era and some cultures appear under many ages.
There is, IIRC, confirmed Ming and Peoples Republic of China in this game. Both have Beijing as their capital in real life. It is likely they will be taken by two different players in the same game. Which one is getting Beijing on their name list? Which one gets Nanjing? Its like deciding whether to take away London and York from England lol. Maybe those names are simply duplicated and nobody cares, as with Tripoli in Lebanon and Tripoli in Libya, or many Alexandrias?
Now I have realized that I have no idea how cities in this game are named in general with its "changing cultures" concept - do your cities change names with eras and other cultures, or you have an option to change them, or does your culture name newly settled cities in this era but does not rename previous cities... Etc.
I don't really see it as a problem. First come, first served does seem to make sense. Aside from extensive transitioning the same culture for multiple eras this avoid weird situations.
All your examples aren't that hard to answer if you allow extensive city lists (30-50 cities) which overlap a lot. So extensive city lists does not mean "obscure town," except for the Huns, Olmecs etc for which a list of 5 gets obscure. If Rome founded the city of Rome in the classical era, Italy obviously can't do so in the industrial era any more; and that's not that much a problem as the cities Italy founds are colonies and satellite cities anyway - not your core cities. And there are still enough important cities for Italy that Rome probably didn't or couldn't found, as I don't expect anyone to settle more than 30 cities per era. Same for Moscow: if Russia founds it, the Soviets can't - and if they double St. Petersburg and Leningrad, this is okay for me. The Zhou can't found Bejing, but the Ming can later on - and if they didn't do it, the PRC might - or found Shanghai instead.
Where's the big problem? Rome being founded by another player than who is now playing as Italy and being outside its borders? Oh well... it's not really bothering more than having Rome as a small overseas territory set up to get a strategic resource from the arctic, because you founded it as your 28th city.
I think this is it. China won’t have Beijing as it’s capital... that will be Fenghao, or Mycenae, or Babylon or whichever city you founded back in the ancient era.
We don’t know much about the mechanics, but it seems like the city lists in Humankind are likely to be a patchwork of the different cultures you played throughout the game (unless your cities change name each era, in which case the clashes never happen!)
This is why it makes sense for the city names to change with each era. I know that the devs want to present the accretion of cultures through time, but the fact that city center and EQ architecture remains the same does that well in my opinion (also the legacy traits). In history, city names frequently change as cultures accumulate (e.g Byzantium-Constantinople-Konstantiniyye-Istanbul). Everyone keeps mentioning Beijing as an example of a problem, but that city has had so many names through history!
But that can be quite confusing, as you as the player have to adapt every x turns to new names.
It's worth it IMHO.
If the game changes the names of my cities and there's no way to shut that off I think that would be a deal-breaker for me, I wouldn't even try playing it.
The devs already said that the names of the cities won't change every time you change cultures. I agree that it won't make much sense that every time a culture changes every city name in the game is changed, it runs against the idea of the history and evolution of your city being reflected on the map.
That being said, it is a fact that the names of cities do indeed change during the course of history. Maybe there could be some sort of city project (like that in previous Civ game that allowed you to build a palace and thus move your capital) that allows you to rename a given city, with some sort of costs and also a benefit.
I think it was confirmed that you can rename your cities, so there's at least that.
Moving your capital like in earlier civ games by building a palace would be quite nice! It could also be related with the era/culture progression: whenever you choose a new culture, you are prompted to denote a capital for this culture. If the capital is different than the one before, there is some cost coming with that, but you get the bonus yields traditionally associated with capitals in this city. Would be a bit like the crown focus in ck2.
Sadly, I can't even yet take a guess at the requirements, since optimization is ongoing. But for the most beautiful experience, you will probably need a relatively good rig (that, or look at a picture of Horatio.)
On the speculation regarding the city names: As mentioned before, cities do not rename themselves as you change cultures, but you can rename them manually. I'd have to dig around for specifics on how the city names are picked when you found a city, though, and I am not even sure how much of that I can reveal yet.
Separate names with a comma.