Humankind - Goths discussion thread

[Boris Gudenuf]

We are, as usual, veering a little Off Topic in that the Goths are pretty much Not A Factor by the 'Renaissance' unless you count the mis-named architectural style . . .

On the other hand, if we must have Eras, and in Humankind that appears to be the basis for the structure of the game, then there are several 'non-Eurocentric' ways to go.
To summarize (from several of my old college textbooks):
Technological 'Eras':
Neolithic
Chalcolithic (“Copper Age”)
Bronze Age
Iron Age
Machine Age (1880 - 1945 CE)
Atomic Age (1945 - 2020 CE)
Space Age (1957 - 2020 CE)
Information Age (1970 - 2020 CE)

Historiographical 'Eras':
Neolithic
Bronze Age
Iron Age
Post Classical (5th - 15th centuries CE)
.....Early
.....High
.....Late
Early Modern Period (1500 - 1800 CE)
..... Age of Reason
.....Age of Enlightenment
Late Modern Period
.....Industrial Revolution
Contemporary History 1970 - 2020

General Eras or Periods:
Pre-History
.....Neolithic
.....Chalcolithic
Ancient History
.....Classical Antiquity
Post-Classical History (200 - 1500 CE)
.....Middle Ages (5th - 15th centuries)
..........Early Middle Ages
..........High Middle Ages
..........Late Middle Ages
Modern History
.....Early Modern Period
.....Late Modern Period (1750 CE on)
.....Contemporary History (1945 - 2020 CE)
..........Post-Modern (1973 - 2020 CE)

As you can see, there is quite a bit of overlap early on, and Humankind using Neolithic and Bronze Era was right in line with that, and changing Bronze to Ancient isn't far off either (and has the advantage that the discovery and use of Bronze was only a small part of the 'Ancient Period' chronologically)
After that it gets complicated, and after the 'Classical' it gets positively Chaotic. Note that most of the beginning and ending dates for the 'Eras' are missing, and that's because here is a lot of debate and little agreement on precisely when any of them began or ended, because those dates vary with the part of the world or even the individual culture/state/faction.

I suggest, though, that for a 'near universal' set of Eras which, however, also lack any of the popularlly-accepted labels, something like:

Neolithic
Ancient
Classical
Post Classical
Early Modern
Late Modern
Contemporary
Post Modern (Future?)

That would cover everybody BUT you would have to include the possibility that not everyone (every Faction) would follow the same technological, social, or civic 'path' through the Eras.
Just for instance, central/eastern Africa never went through a Bronze Age at all - straight from Neolithic to Iron, and even primitive steel by the time Europe was in the Classical Era. And a good case can be made, as has been argued here and elsewhere, that the social/civic events that included the Age of Reason and Age of Enlightenment never occurred in most fo the world outside of Europe's influence, and so to some extent they still have to go through them - there is an extreme Disconnect between technological and civic/social 'progress' across the world's regions and areas, and therefore across the Factions in each Era.

 

[Jkchart]

I mean there's probably better names for the Eras, and I agree with you, Exploration is most likely a better name, you could also call Enlightenment "Imperial" era, the fact remains...there's an ugly hole in there, in civ is rather clear, in a blink you go from early muskets to infantry or catapults to cannons (the pacing there is quite odd). We are yet to see how Humankind handles this and how long each era plays, if there's enough units and buildings between "renaisssance" and "industrial", coupled with civs being able to trascend it might not even be an issue beyond naming.

I think "Imperial Age" is an excellent option

 

[conorbebe]

I still very much prefer Civ’s choice to use “Ancient Era” over “Bronze Era”. It’s less specific which is fitting for Humankind’s approach of representing both Bronze and Iron Age cultures in the same era, and personally I think it’s more consistent with naming convention chosen for the other eras.

And as stated by others, it’s less Eurocentric and would encompass all ancient cultures, including those that did not develop metallurgy. I believe I’m not mistaken in saying the Olmecs did not have this technology? So using “Bronze” or “Iron” to describe this era is also simply false. Whereas terms like “Ancient” and “Classical” are more vague and don’t encounter the same issues.

 

[Catoninetales_Amplitude]

I still very much prefer Civ’s choice to use “Ancient Era” over “Bronze Era”. It’s less specific which is fitting for Humankind’s approach of representing both Bronze and Iron Age cultures in the same era, and personally I think it’s more consistent with naming convention chosen for the other eras.

Well, I got good news for you then: We ahve recently re-named the Bronze Era to Ancient Era. Sadly, this happened after we finished revealing the Ancient cultures, so we could not call it out with the Culture Cards.
This is one of the many reasons everything we put out is marked as "pre-alpha:" The whole thing is full of placeholders.

 

[Krajzen]

Well, I got good news for you then: We ahve recently re-named the Bronze Era to Ancient Era. Sadly, this happened after we finished revealing the Ancient cultures, so we could not call it out with the Culture Cards.
This is one of the many reasons everything we put out is marked as "pre-alpha:" The whole thing is full of placeholders.

Could you then consider alternate names for "Renaissance" era?

In my opinion there should be no Renaissance era and instead the gap between medieval and industrial being named "enlightenment" or "exploration" era. Because "Renaissance" is the word which doesnt make sense outside medieval Europe rediscovering Greek-Roman classics.
What really matters in 1500-1800 time period is not that cultural rediscovery per se, but Exploration as in the entire world becoming significantly more connected and more aware (and Europeans didn't have to be the ones to do it first) and Enlightenment as in: the birth of Scientific Method which was necessary for industrial revolution. And that was a process of intellectual development which started way before 18th century.
It would make much more sense for non European cultures if an entire 1500-1800 era was named Enlightenment, as in: "the equivalent of 18th century intellectual breakthrough is necessary for a culture to reach industrial revolution".
[The entire problem was noticed when some Western intellectuals were saying Islam needs to have "Renaissance", or even better, "Reformation", while Muslim intellectuals and historians alike answered "those are eurocentric terms and if anything then enlightenment would be better]

Although by now my feelings have changed slightly and I don't think "Renaissance" would be that bad.

Now I am wondering, in fact, if "medieval era" isn't sillier name - eurocentric again, named as "middle ages between classical antiquity and modern times". I am wondering if FEUDAL wouldn't be more universal.

 

[conorbebe]

Well, I got good news for you then: We ahve recently re-named the Bronze Era to Ancient Era. Sadly, this happened after we finished revealing the Ancient cultures, so we could not call it out with the Culture Cards.
This is one of the many reasons everything we put out is marked as "pre-alpha:" The whole thing is full of placeholders.

Really wasn't expecting to hear this! That's fantastic!!

You know I can't tell you how optimistic it makes me feel to know the dev team are still making adjustments, listening to feedback, and engaging with the community, even at such an early stage. It really shows that Amplitude is making Humankind with players in mind, and I think we all appreciate this immensely.

 

[ehecatzin]

Well, I got good news for you then: We ahve recently re-named the Bronze Era to Ancient Era. Sadly, this happened after we finished revealing the Ancient cultures, so we could not call it out with the Culture Cards.
This is one of the many reasons everything we put out is marked as "pre-alpha:" The whole thing is full of placeholders.

Every game is in flux during development, but kudos for actually taking in feedback and not being afraid tweaking the game to make it clearer

 

[Catoninetales_Amplitude]

Could you then consider alternate names for "Renaissance" era?

If I were you, I wouldn't be too concerned about that particular term making it into the release version...

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

Maybe HK should take a page from Friends and label their eras something like:

"The One Where Some People Started to Build Cities"

"The One Where Some Kick Ass Empires Arose"

"The One Where People Learned Some Things But Forgot Other Things"

"The One Where People Remembered Some of Those Other Things and Found Other People They Didn't Know About Before"

"The One Where People Learned to Use Machines to Make Life Better But Also Worse"

"This One"

"The Next One"

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

If I were you, I wouldn't be too concerned about that particular term making it into the release version...

Just to combine a couple of Humankind mechanisms:

Use 'non-denominational' Era titles: Ancient, Classical, Post-Classical, Early Modern, Modern, Post Modern, or their equivalents.

Then, in the 'Fame' scores, give extra points for the Faction/AI/Gamer that enters a specific Era/Age/or Period First. These could be related to some specific Technology or Civic/Social Policy event, such as:

Research Bronze-Working first - "Enter the Bronze Age" for extra Fame
Research Iron-Working first - "Entered the Iron Age"
First to build a University, or X number of Universities: "Entered the Age of Enlightenment"
First to Research Steam/Steam Power: "Enter the Industrial Age"
Have access to or exploit every 'Luxury' resource on the map: "Entered the Gilded Age"
Research Modern Pharmaceuticials, or Biochemistry (20th century): "Enter the Age of Aquarius"

And, of course, remember what one fellow said about Eras and History:

"We are Here and This is Now. Everything else is Moonshine."

 

[Krajzen]

I just wanted to express my happiness at Goths being in this game, God knows when they will visit Sid Meier's. Such massively cool culture from the underappreciated period of "however the hell you name 200 AD - 800 AD Jesus Christ let's not argue about it here"

 

[FinalDoomsday]

Indeed it's great to have another chance at leading the Goths I was excited to see them in Total War: Attila as they had a compelling narrative stuck between the Huns and Rome but it was pretty dissapointing in the end as they generally just played as maurading barbarians with no real way to inherit the collapsing Roman Empire or 'romanise' instead you literally had to convert imperial palaces and forums into wooden great houses and mead halls. I found Rome a city of marble and left it a city of wood...

 

[Krajzen]

Indeed it's great to have another chance at leading the Goths I was excited to see them in Total War: Attila as they had a compelling narrative stuck between the Huns and Rome but it was pretty dissapointing in the end as they generally just played as maurading barbarians with no real way to inherit the collapsing Roman Empire or 'romanise' instead you literally had to convert imperial palaces and forums into wooden great houses and mead halls. I found Rome a city of marble and left it a city of wood...

Offtopic, your comment made me specifically look after Gothic mods in steam workshop and there are two separate mods which give Ostrogoths capacity to build and repair some Roman buildings to represent just that thanks as I wouldnt discover them without you mentioning the problem.

Goths are so badass, really cool to get them in Humankind, they are the best at encapsulating the Migration Period and might of ancient Germanic peoples. Well Franks and Saxons (Anglo Saxons) are great as well but more represent later period of like 8th - 10th century kingdoms. And with all my sympathy towards Vandals, Suebi, Lombards etc, they seem "too specific" for me to include them in the unmodded game. And I dislike pre - 3rd century ancient Germania (badly documented, frankly primitive, and very overrated Teutoburg battle).

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Offtopic, your comment made me specifically look after Gothic mods in steam workshop and there are two separate mods which give Ostrogoths capacity to build and repair some Roman buildings to represent just that thanks as I wouldnt discover them without you mentioning the problem.

Goths are so badass, really cool to get them in Humankind, they are the best at encapsulating the Migration Period and might of ancient Germanic peoples. Well Franks and Saxons (Anglo Saxons) are great as well but more represent later period of like 8th - 10th century kingdoms. And with all my sympathy towards Vandals, Suebi, Lombards etc, they seem "too specific" for me to include them in the unmodded game. And I dislike pre - 3rd century ancient Germania (badly documented, frankly primitive, and very overrated Teutoburg battle).

There's actually a fair amount of information on pre-3rd century CE Germanics, but you have to delve into German archeological reports and Roman secondary 'witnesses' to get at them. That said, there's not much to make them stand out: Teutoburger Wald is constantly brought up, because it was very nearly their only victory over Rome! Basically, they were hunters with some scratch agriculture, unarmored spearmen with some javelin-armed cavalry. The only notable military among them was one tribe that painted their bodies black from head to toe down one side, which at least would make for a striking graphic image!
On the other hand, they did a lot more trading with Rome and Gaul than is usually appreciated, supplying everything from Amber to Timber to raw metals to human hair (there was a fad in Rome for Blond Wigs, which the Germans supplied) in exchange for Roman wine, glassware, and finer metalwork, among other things. You could go 'against type' and make them Mercantile/Traders instead of Howling Hostile Nutters . . .