Humankind Game by Amplitude

I'd give them expansionist because the extra administrators you get would fit well but like with many large cultures that stayed around for a long time you can probably make the case for a lot (if not all) affinities.
 
I am honestly shocked by how well this game is optimized so far. We don't know AI turn times yet, but what we got so far is quite impressive with this graphical quality.

I'd like to notice now that actually Humankind is sort of going after cartoonish vibe as well as civ6. But oh God I think everybody here will agree with how much better this style looks.


I am also shocked by the fact that Humankind (2021), Doom Eternal (2020) and even Witcher 3 are much better optimized on my PC than Attila Total War (2015), Jesus Christ what went wrong here :D
 
I can see them being militaristic, as their expansionism also lead to their downfall by just being too big and too diverse. By the early modern era, they definitely were more expansionistic. I expect them to have an expansionist affinity with a militaristic ability or vice-versa (i.e. something about big bombards). Janissaries can be tied in quite nice by connecting them to conquered territories so that the Ottomans suit you if you had expanded aggressively in the first few eras and now have a diverse empire under your control. Civ tried that in 6, but it ended up more gimmicky than useful as the game is just not set up to take advantages of such historical details. For Humankind, add in an economic emblematic quarter (the Istanbul basar can be quite iconic from the air) and you got a very nicely rounded out civ.

Keep in mind, they might want to leave the door open to a barbary coast culture and a modern era Turkey which for sure will come (it's a marked break, it kinda flows naturally etymologically and Turkey is a game market), even if not necessarily in the vanilla game.
 
mitsho said:
I can see them being militaristic, as their expansionism also lead to their downfall by just being too big and too diverse. By the early modern era, they definitely were more expansionistic
Click to expand...
Well that is more or less a problem all large empires face. Ottomans did however last a long time.
 
mitsho said:
I can see them being militaristic, as their expansionism also lead to their downfall by just being too big and too diverse. By the early modern era, they definitely were more expansionistic. I expect them to have an expansionist affinity with a militaristic ability or vice-versa (i.e. something about big bombards). Janissaries can be tied in quite nice by connecting them to conquered territories so that the Ottomans suit you if you had expanded aggressively in the first few eras and now have a diverse empire under your control. Civ tried that in 6, but it ended up more gimmicky than useful as the game is just not set up to take advantages of such historical details. For Humankind, add in an economic emblematic quarter (the Istanbul basar can be quite iconic from the air) and you got a very nicely rounded out civ.

Keep in mind, they might want to leave the door open to a barbary coast culture and a modern era Turkey which for sure will come (it's a marked break, it kinda flows naturally etymologically and Turkey is a game market), even if not necessarily in the vanilla game.
Click to expand...

I hope they will don't use the word Bazaar if Ottomans get an economic quarter in HK. I know than Civ 6 used the Great Bazaar (which is famous btw), but it will be a kind of lazy. Bazaar is more emblematic to Iranian/Persian culture, and was transmited absolutely everywhere (to Ottomans, India, even in Europe and China). So it's not really an emblematic architecture of the Ottoman culture.

The Great Bazaar of Istanbul was originally called "The Bedesten of Gems" or "New Bedesten". The bedesten is an architecture of market similar to the bazaar but exclusively developped by Ottomans with some architectural differences and different usages. Obviously, I suspect generic Economic Quarter looking like generic Bazaar for Early Modern middle east / Ottomans architecture assets.

But an economic quarter for Ottomans will totally exclude their uniqueness compared to other cultures from this geographical zone : They have access to Byzantine knowledges and builded impressive architectures. So I'm divided about the choice of an economic EQ (which does not reflect this know-how)

I already spoken about that on another thread, but I don't see how it is so evident than a "modern era Turkey will come in the game". I'm really not sure about that, for me it's look really complicated.
Yes today Turkey is now a military superpower, but I doubt we will have any 2020 culture representation in the game.
For most of the modern era, they were in really hard time, building a new national identity on blood, being neutral or pawn in wars, a lot of coups and instability, etc etc... still experiencing the consequences of the Ottomans Fall.
I'm maybe wrong, but looks not so evident for me, I can't even imagine their representation (Ataturk ? really short to represent a whole culture, and polemic today, which EQ, which EU ?)
 
I think the Neo-Osmanism is what gives Turkey a chance for the modern era, not much else. Hence, Turkey would have to be militaristic, and I‘m not sold on modern militaristic and expansionist being represented in the game. The great expanders and militarists of the era, such as the US will be merchant, agrarian, or scientist, the PRC builder, the soviets, erm, scientists? That said, I think post-50s Egypt/short-lived United Arab Republic is the most interesting choice for the Middle East region and that era (Nasser would have made a great civ VI leader). Iran is a good choice as well, even if that could mean overdoing the theocracy aspect. Algeria, KSA, Oman, Qatar or UAE all could bring some interesting aspects to the game (even a bland extra gold from natural resources), but seem rather unlikely.
 
Nobody today is Ottoman, they are Turks or have Turkish roots. It'd be foolish to miss such an easy and smooth naming transition. Again, I'm not saying they are in the original ten. But I also want to point out, that inclusion is not about "strength" or noteworthiness. See all the Chinese missing and don't we also miss the Sumerians?

I'm imagining the modern era cultures as make-or-break ones. If you are comfortable in your progress, it'd be probably better to transcend from Industrial for the last stretch. But if you want to change up, you have to modernize quite radically, so cultures that underwent stark transitions somewhere around 1900 are prime candidates for me. And Turkey really fits that. Yes, you might take an Arab Oil State and many other cultures first, but I can see an Ataturk culture (not an Erdogan one, mind me) as a contrast to an Islamic Republic of Iran-one. Modernizing versus tradition, so to say.
 
Personally I don't want a chinese culture in all era .Please, no 6 chinese cultures in the game, let's some space to other cultures. There will be modding for that. And with Babylonians and Assyrians being already in Ancient Era, I don't really miss Sumer. BTW it's really subjective, but I prefer to have some other Ancient cultures.

For the comfortable progress, I don't know, trenscending Ottomans Empire seems really decent for me. I really miss a predecessor for them, instead of modern turkey. The Seljuks have really good clash with Byzantine and Crusaders or the Oghuz Turks because there is no turkic semi-nomadic people in the game.
And like I say in my previous post, there is so much debates around modern Turkey, just for Atarturk, a lot of Turk consider he had removed some of the uniqueness of their culture, their sophisticated calligraphy, adopted western clothings, hmm... I don't know, there is maybe another contemporary culture which can maybe fill the job for this archetype. And in hk, they don't represent regime or leaders, so the Ataturk period will represent the whole kemalist period, I think it is useless to recall the terrible things that happened in that period. I don't want a game become too much political, it's the risk when you take a too recent cultural representation btw

And if they want to fill all the lineage for all confirmed culture, the whole cultures dlc pool will be really limited, I don't think there is any rules about that.
 
China has contained 15 - 20% of human population for last three millenias and 20 - 25% of global economy until 19th century. It is a three millenia old behemoth with a lot of faces. On the contrary, I am perfectly fine with China getting 6 cultures at some point - only this game can represent the enormous scale of Chinese civilization fairly, not lumping entire China together but splitting hits in other areas of the world.

Anyway, returning to the today's topic:
I think Ottomans will be simply named Turks, and definitely expansionist.
 
yes probably Turks or delayed. And definitly expansionist with the Poles already being militarist.

I am just fine with an additional fourth chinese culture, Han dlc for exemple.
 
I am not a fan of many representatives of the same culture for different eras. But certainly the culture that deserve the more this is China.
India is close, but personally I dont see the indian cultures as "the same" on different eras, but as different cultures from India. The closer India-like case for China would be Qing, but I hope we could also get a independent Jurchen/Manchu (Jin) culture, plus the Tibetan (Tufan) and Miao (Yelang?).
 
Siptah said:
I think the Neo-Osmanism is what gives Turkey a chance for the modern era, not much else. Hence, Turkey would have to be militaristic, and I‘m not sold on modern militaristic and expansionist being represented in the game. The great expanders and militarists of the era, such as the US will be merchant, agrarian, or scientist, the PRC builder, the soviets, erm, scientists? That said, I think post-50s Egypt/short-lived United Arab Republic is the most interesting choice for the Middle East region and that era (Nasser would have made a great civ VI leader). Iran is a good choice as well, even if that could mean overdoing the theocracy aspect. Algeria, KSA, Oman, Qatar or UAE all could bring some interesting aspects to the game (even a bland extra gold from natural resources), but seem rather unlikely.
Click to expand...

I had the idea of modern Turkey being aestethe.
I mean, Turkish aestethics, patterns, dress, rugs, architecture, music, TV series, literature (Organ Pamuk and others), Turkey being one of the biggest tourism powerhouses by arrivals - I'd be fine with modern Turkey representing that sort of oriental allure.
Then you give them some modern Turkish model of tank or plane or whatever (to go away from ww1), and you got the uncontroversial modern Turkish civ.

20th century Iran is much more difficult case for the modern era, everything was either third world country or quickly developing but extremely controversial regime, with not much room for some "innocent coolness". That's why I am supporting industrial Iran when it could get aestethic affinity as well, and for good reasons.
 
Krajzen said:
When is open dev going to continue?
Click to expand...

Nobody knows. Maybe they go silent for a few months and release another batch of scenarios to test other parts of the game.
 
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
335
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