Humankind Game by Amplitude

[God of Kings]

Aluminium is literally "the third most abundant element in Earth's crust and also the most abundant metal" by Wikipedia. Yeah sure, a rare strategic resource limiting modern warfare.

When the Washington Monument was built, aluminum was very difficult to extract and thus among the most expensive metals.

Now you know why the Washington Monument is capped with aluminum.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

When the Washington Monument was built, aluminum was very difficult to extract and thus among the most expensive metals.

Now you know why the Washington Monument is capped with aluminum.

Because efficient extraction of aluminum from bauxite ores is done with hydroelectric power, which was not available when the Washington Monument was built. Ironically, the center of US aluminum production through Wold War Two was up here in the Pacific Northwest, because the public works projects of the late 1930s built a bunch of hydroelectric dams along the Columbia River, and we still get a high percentage of our electricity from them - it made aluminum production both cheap and easy up here.

@Krajzen, you are preaching to the choir! Most of the 'strategic resources' in the game are limited because of the technology and industrial infrastructure required, not the ores or raw materials (as in the hydroelectric example for aluminum in the previous paragraph).

Iron is another good example: abundantly available, at least in the relatively small quantities required for pre-industrial use. The limiting factor was technology: forced-air draft furnaces to reach high enough temperature to produce 'wrought' iron, the even higher temps required to melt the iron and produce cast iron, and the techniques of adding just the right amount of carbon and removing the 'extraneous' impurities to produce Steel, and finally adding the right alloy materials to produce armor plate and specialized steel alloys for modern construction. Obtaining the iron ore only becomes a major problem and limiting factor when you need it in quantities of 1000s of tons - as in, when you are trying to build railroads, battleships and cities full of skyscrapers, or the Industrial Era and later.

Oil, unfortunately, is the Outlier. For the bulk of the post-industrial eras, there is simply no substitute for it to run everything military, and the requirements, as for modern steel, are in the 1000s of tons and it tends to be readily available only in certain areas which, therefore, become instantly of Major Strategic Importance. The historical fact is that countries without lots of oil got hammered by those who had it, and cutting the supply of oil was the quickest way to strangle any enemy military forces - see Germany and Japan in World War Two for the most obvious examples, but Italy is an even better example: Fascist Italy had a very good navy, but had Zero sources for oil and had to get everything from Germany (who controlled the major European source, the Rumanian Ploesti oil complex). When the Nazis couldn't supply the oil (after 1941) the Italian Navy was Out of the War - they literally couldn't move out of port.
On the one hand, this is a guaranteed Frustration Factor to the player who has laboriously tended his Civ from 4000 BCE to the twentieth century and then discovered he is Oil-less, on the other hand it means, like Italy, that you should only go to war if you have Allies that can give/sell/loan you oil. I personally don't mind having 'extra' strategic/diplomatic decisions to make, but I'm probably in the minority here.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Oh, and to answer the original question about Strategic Resources in Humankind, I have seen Horse and Iron and Copper on maps/screenshots, but no indication (yet) on how or if those are used in any strategic sense. That is, does having a single Horse Resource give you horses for every possible equine purpose, or do you need lots of them, can you 'move' them (breed), do various units take varying amounts of Horse Resource?
I suspect that they will do something different from Civ with resources, but am not sure what that will be in regard to resources and Units.
Their earlier effort, Endless Legend, had numerous resources required in various quantities for various units and unit upgrades, so potentially they could have a very complex system in Humankind . . .

 

[DaviddesJ]

Because efficient extraction of aluminum from bauxite ores is done with hydroelectric power, which was not available when the Washington Monument was built.

The Bayer process for producing alumina wasn't even invented until 1888, so there wasn't any cheap way of producing alumina to electrolyze into aluminum metal even if you had cheap electricity. The dynamo for electric power generation also wasn't invented until 1870.

 

[mitsho]

Resources in general are one thing I would like to see revisited in the next big historical 4X Strategy game. don't think Humankind will be the one since we already have seen such resources present on the map. But which copper mine is still in continuous use since antiquity when you would put them down in Humankind? So, mines should deplete for realism and to make space for other infrastructures, but that implies a complex economic system that doesn't require everyone to have a copper mine. The complex economic system is also required for other resources such as agricultural ones: We humans spread the coffee plant all over the world, it's not one that stays in that particular tile for all eternity. Climate changes and Humankind can simulate that quite well with their biomes, different terrain heights and so on: you can plant coffee only under these conditions. But then, the map is too small to depict all the diversity the real world has and with the growing cities in Humankind, you will have less place to put these resources. Simply, the 4x game isn't an economic simulator for a complex resource system like Anno, Settler or any Tycoon game is.

So yeah, I don't have the perfect resource system in mind. But I hope that they don't replicate the civ categories of bonus - luxury - strategic. Rather something like: agricultural - (herd) animals - "wild products" (like turtles) - minerals - refined products - and so on. So, not the effect but how they behave on the map, and how they interact with the player/cultures.

 

[FinalDoomsday]

Endless Legend and Endless Space both have strategic and luxury resources so I'd expect it to come back in some form.

The biggest problem I had with Civ 6's resources was Infantry requiring oil per turn maintinence, the same as a tank no less! Hopefully Humankind keeps basic units free of any advanced resource costs so even poorer nations can field some conscript type units.

 

[Siptah]

We’ve seen that the Egyptian EQ requires a certain amount of horses, so strategic resources might work just like in EL.

as for natural resources like iron and oil: it would be a good start if deposits are no longer infinite. Better technology might increase the amount you can exploit as you progress through the eras - anno might be a good guideline here; eu4‘s gold mine system in which the risk of collapse and inflation rise when you exploit too much is probably too micro-intensive.

i hope that all resources only appear in fitting biomes and are not arbitrarily assigned and limited to certain continents like in civ.

 

[ost]

But which copper mine is still in continuous use since antiquity

This is just a fun anecdote, but due to the progressive degradation in ore quality (and commensurate improvement in refining and processing methods) throughout the millenia, ancient Roman slag heaps and mines abandoned due to "low copper content" (judged by the standards of their day) have been mined in the modern age as they actually represent some of the highest ore quality available anywhere in the contemporary world. Some enterprising geologists went so far as to consult ancient Roman texts for clues on where abandoned mines might be.

I agree that the way strategic resources work could use a revision. I think it would be cool, if in addition to Tech and Civics trees/wheels, there was also something like an "Artisan" tree, where your culture could specialize in the production of a particular kind of artisanal good. It could be specialty food (like wine, cheese, cooking oil, etc), cultural export (mosaics, paintings, etc), carving, metalworking, the list goes on. For example, if your culture focused on artisanal steel production (like Sri Lankan Wootz steel) it could benefit the combat strength of your units, and if you choose to export your steel on the world market it could also offer a similar benefit to cultures willing to trade for those goods. The presence of strategic and luxury resources could steer your culture to particular artisanal industries - based on raw materials available within your borders (either by completely prohibiting you from choosing certain paths if you lack the material, or just making the bonus stronger if you have a lot of the raw materials).

 

[Elhoim]

What first thing that comes to mind is that "strategic" resources at some tech point get "widespread" and you no longer need it to build units, so they are more of a temporary advantage. It could be handled like a general rule (when you research this tech you no longer need horses/iron/etc to build these units), or as an unlocked building (like a "horse breeder" building that provides the ability to build horse units in that city, or a forge for iron units).

Civ VI could have definitely used that, like that at the medieval era swordsmen no longer require iron to build, so that the AI no longer uses warriors

 

[BuchiTaton]

What about this, "strategic" resources are not a requirement to built and maintain military units but still gives you a huge discounts, like this:

COPPER:
- 50% built cost of Ancient military units.
+ 5% science production

IRON:
- 50% built cost of Classical military units.
+ 10% industry production.

HORSES (*wild horses):
- 50% built cost of cavalry.
+2 attack for cavalry archer.

BRIMSTONE (*sulfur):
- 25% maintanance cost of ranged Early Modern units.
+ 5% food production.

GUANO (*niter):
- 20% maintanance cost of Industrial military units.
+ 5% food production.

COAL:
- 50% maintanance cost of Industrial naval units.
+ 20% industry production.

OIL:
- 50% maintanance of Contemporary motorized and naval units.
+ 20% gold production.

ALUMINIUM:
- 50% built cost of aircrafts.
+ 5% industry production.

TITANIUM:
+ 2 defense for motorized units.
+ 5% science production.

URANIUM:
- 90% built cost of nuclear missile.
+ 5% influence production.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

What about this, "strategic" resources are not a requirement to built and maintain military units but still gives you a huge discounts, like this:

COPPER:
- 50% built cost of Ancient military units.
+ 5% science production

IRON:
- 50% built cost of Classical military units.
+ 10% industry production.

HORSES (*wild horses):
- 50% built cost of cavalry.
+2 attack for cavalry archer.

BRIMSTONE (*sulfur):
- 25% maintanance cost of ranged Early Modern units.
+ 5% food production.

GUANO (*niter):
- 20% maintanance cost of Industrial military units.
+ 5% food production.

COAL:
- 50% maintanance cost of Industrial naval units.
+ 20% industry production.

OIL:
- 50% maintanance of Contemporary motorized and naval units.
+ 20% gold production.

ALUMINIUM:
- 50% built cost of aircrafts.
+ 5% industry production.

TITANIUM:
+ 2 defense for motorized units.
+ 5% science production.

URANIUM:
- 90% built cost of nuclear missile.
+ 5% influence production.

Yes, I love this because it rewards civs for getting these resources but no longer cripples a civ if they are unlucky not to find any on the map nearby.

 

[Siptah]

When you find yourself missing a strategic resource that you need to use, there’s hopefully the option to buy it on the global market.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

The Bayer process for producing alumina wasn't even invented until 1888, so there wasn't any cheap way of producing alumina to electrolyze into aluminum metal even if you had cheap electricity. The dynamo for electric power generation also wasn't invented until 1870.

Precisely my point: the Washington Monument was built when aluminum was a rare and precious metal/resource.
The process works both ways. In many of the silver, gold, and lead mines in the American West in the 19th century, among the rock that was discarded as dross from refining the ores were fairly large amounts of metals that were, at the time, considered worthless: Platinum, Molybdenum, and Chromium - the latter two required for manufacturing Steel Alloy Armor Plate in the 20th century. My father worked for a company in the 1930s which did a great business 'mining' the mountains of 'tailings' - left-over rock from older mines - for now-useful minerals.
This sort of thing occurs time and again in human history, and you can bet that in 50 - 100 years they will be calling us morons for throwing away some resource that is immensely valuable to them . . .

 

[God of Kings]

Precisely my point: the Washington Monument was built when aluminum was a rare and precious metal/resource.
The process works both ways. In many of the silver, gold, and lead mines in the American West in the 19th century, among the rock that was discarded as dross from refining the ores were fairly large amounts of metals that were, at the time, considered worthless: Platinum, Molybdenum, and Chromium - the latter two required for manufacturing Steel Alloy Armor Plate in the 20th century. My father worked for a company in the 1930s which did a great business 'mining' the mountains of 'tailings' - left-over rock from older mines - for now-useful minerals.
This sort of thing occurs time and again in human history, and you can bet that in 50 - 100 years they will be calling us morons for throwing away some resource that is immensely valuable to them . . .

Landfill mining will be a thing. You will find plenty of metals such as aluminum cans (that could have been recycled) and discarded e-waste that contains gold. You can find recyclable plastic from plastic bottles and discarded toys.

 

[DaviddesJ]

Landfill mining will be a thing. You will find plenty of metals such as aluminum cans (that could have been recycled) and discarded e-waste that contains gold. You can find recyclable plastic from plastic bottles and discarded toys.

It's possible, but it's not at all clear that this will ever be the most economical approach. The advantage of ores is that while they are relatively dilute in many cases in the minerals or metals you want, they are also quite homogenous and lend themselves to a uniform industrial process. It's a lot harder to work with a mixture that has perhaps decent concentrations of the stuff you want, but also a lot of stuff that you don't want, including toxins and all sorts of different contaminants.

 

[Catoninetales_Amplitude]

@Catoninetales_Amplitude I am wondering how big maps are in terms of 'free real estate' or rather, territories/cities which a player may found in average conditions, relative to the amount of players.

Let's assume I play a game on a medium map size with default number of players and setting. Should I expect I will be able to settle 5 cities, 10, 15, 20, before uncolonized space ends? Assuming that I want to spam cities ad infinitum, because the question is more about the size of maps rather than "tall vs wide". Although that is a question as well - does HK aim closer civ5 extreme (four cities is a global empire) or civ6 extreme (infinite city spam is recommended).

Also, did I understand correctly, that a map editor won't be on release but maaaybe it will be later, and that we won't get much modding tools on release but they maaaaybe come later?

As I mentioned, to me the map felt about as big as an equivalent Civ map... But I am not a very good Civ6 player, so I was probably not expanding as much as I should in that. I think there's a decent chunk of territory to grab when you are playing with the recommended number of players, but whether that means many small cities, four or five large cities, or a single Megacity is up to you.

Does this mean that conquered EQs stick around and this city was conquered two times in antiquity?

Emblematic Quarters (as well as City Center architecture) are maintained when a city gets conquered.

Is the game going to contain strategic resources required for units recruitment? If so, did anybody spot what they are?

We have strategic and luxury resources, but not bonuses resources (the "Natural Modifiers" that change tile yields are not considered resources), but that's as much as I can say right now.

i hope that all resources only appear in fitting biomes and are not arbitrarily assigned and limited to certain continents like in civ.

As far as I know, resource spawns (as well as the natural modifiers) depend on both biome and terrain type, so that they make sense where they appear.

 

[CivLuvah]

Another rich info dump from Reddit!

https://www.reddit.com/r/HumankindT...information_in_screenshots_from_a_press_tour/

 

[need my speed]

As I mentioned, to me the map felt about as big as an equivalent Civ map... But I am not a very good Civ6 player

To be sure, this means a 'Civ 6 map', then? Because since Civilization III, maps have progressively become smaller and smaller, which is a huge shame... I want my 100+ city empires back (I know, this won't at all fit in the scope of Humankind, what with quarters and tactical combat ).

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

To be sure, this means a 'Civ 6 map', then? Because since Civilization III, maps have progressively become smaller and smaller, which is a huge shame... I want my 100+ city empires back (I know, this won't at all fit in the scope of Humankind, what with quarters and tactical combat ).

The real question is whether a map with several hundred regions suitable for planting cities with all the terrain graphics and animations we've seen so far in Humankind (flowing waterfalls, animals roaming the prairies, birds in the air, crowds of people walking through the cities, etc) could be played on any average or even above-average computer.

 

[Krajzen]

Resources in general are one thing I would like to see revisited in the next big historical 4X Strategy game. don't think Humankind will be the one since we already have seen such resources present on the map. But which copper mine is still in continuous use since antiquity when you would put them down in Humankind? So, mines should deplete for realism and to make space for other infrastructures, but that implies a complex economic system that doesn't require everyone to have a copper mine. The complex economic system is also required for other resources such as agricultural ones: We humans spread the coffee plant all over the world, it's not one that stays in that particular tile for all eternity. Climate changes and Humankind can simulate that quite well with their biomes, different terrain heights and so on: you can plant coffee only under these conditions. But then, the map is too small to depict all the diversity the real world has and with the growing cities in Humankind, you will have less place to put these resources. Simply, the 4x game isn't an economic simulator for a complex resource system like Anno, Settler or any Tycoon game is.

So yeah, I don't have the perfect resource system in mind. But I hope that they don't replicate the civ categories of bonus - luxury - strategic. Rather something like: agricultural - (herd) animals - "wild products" (like turtles) - minerals - refined products - and so on. So, not the effect but how they behave on the map, and how they interact with the player/cultures.

See, those are kinds of innovations I desire: depleting minerals, surveying, spreading resources and animals. Or imagine this: exploration lin units are simultaneously surveyors who detect mineral resources in their line of sight. Every mineral resource may deplete in 2 - 4 eras, depending on size of the local heap (you get warning in the last era that "depletion of ore is in sight...). However, to balance that, in the medieval and industrial eras there are two technologies which reveal previously hidden mineral resources.
Meanwhile, each plant/animal resource has its "preferred habitat" (for example wet, flat land) and can be spread to those tiles, but it takes a long time and significant cost (it is way easier in later eras).

The biggest problem I had with Civ 6's resources was Infantry requiring oil per turn maintinence, the same as a tank no less! Hopefully Humankind keeps basic units free of any advanced resource costs so even poorer nations can field some conscript type units.

See, thats the brilliance of "common sense" of civ6 design, permeating it it f bottom to top. Start with a reasonable conclusion (infantry also consumes oil) but neither do balance nor sanity checks, just push full throttle and drive off a cliff into the realm of unbalanced features which are stupider that problems they were supposed to solve.

What about this, "strategic" resources are not a requirement to built and maintain military units but still gives you a huge discounts, like this:

COPPER:
- 50% built cost of Ancient military units.
+ 5% science production

IRON:
- 50% built cost of Classical military units.
+ 10% industry production.

HORSES (*wild horses):
- 50% built cost of cavalry.
+2 attack for cavalry archer.

BRIMSTONE (*sulfur):
- 25% maintanance cost of ranged Early Modern units.
+ 5% food production.

GUANO (*niter):
- 20% maintanance cost of Industrial military units.
+ 5% food production.

COAL:
- 50% maintanance cost of Industrial naval units.
+ 20% industry production.

OIL:
- 50% maintanance of Contemporary motorized and naval units.
+ 20% gold production.

ALUMINIUM:
- 50% built cost of aircrafts.
+ 5% industry production.

TITANIUM:
+ 2 defense for motorized units.
+ 5% science production.

URANIUM:
- 90% built cost of nuclear missile.
+ 5% influence production.

This is genius, I want this in civ6.

The real question is whether a map with several hundred regions suitable for planting cities with all the terrain graphics and animations we've seen so far in Humankind (flowing waterfalls, animals roaming the prairies, birds in the air, crowds of people walking through the cities, etc) could be played on any average or even above-average computer.

Several hundred regions? I expect 100 - 125 territories to be the biggest default map size. The game is designed around 10 players (besides obligatory mods) and I presume no City States (in EL minor factions have 1-3 one tile dwellings in a given territory). And then to have on average 10 big territories just for yourself, with no rivals, is approaching 'boring lack of pressure, too spread out players' amount. That's why I have hated one of the most popular civ5 mods ever, that one with super gigantic Earth, a lot of people gave it 5 stars without actually checking how garbage it is to play really underpopulated map.