Your first game of Humankind

[TheSpaceCowboy]

Based on what we know so far, how do you plan on playing your first game of Humankind? Do you have specific Cultures you plan to pursue, or will you simply go with whatever best satisfies your gameplay needs at the moment? As an example, here's my intentions:

Cultures

• Ancient: Mycenaeans
• Classical: Greeks (or maybe Romans)
• Medieval: Byzantines (if Greek, Teutons if Roman)
• Early Modern: (so far) Iroquois
• Fifth era: America (presumably)
• Sixth era: United States (presumably)

For Civics, in my first game, I'm always going to choose whichever civic I'd go with in real life, irrespective of gameplay. If all other things are equal, I'll pursue whichever civic leads to my desired ideology. Likewise with narrative events, I'll choose what I would in that context, only considering the gameplay effects as a potential tie-breaker.

Ideologies

• Economy - Not Collectivism (what's it called?)
• Geopolitics - Homeland
• Government - Liberty
• Society - What are my choices? Tradition and what else?

Civics

• Army Composition - Professional Soldiers
• Land Rights - Inherited Lands
• Leadership - Small Council

Narrative events
Gladiators, Ready! - Forbid
Keepers of the Creed - Men

 

[Krajzen]

I'm sorry not to respond affirmatively, but I do genuinely think that such perfectionism and planning way before the present time are harmful to the enjoyment of video games, any leisure, and life in general... That's a game, not a job, I am trying to no longer look at my hobbies like at perfectionist tasks to fulfill. Similarly, I am not going to research the content of this game too deeply before getting my hands on it. A work and a danger require careful planning a long time before, but I think such perfectionist approach is destructive when taken to passions and hobbies.
At least it has caused a lot of damage to my mental health.
I'm going to go blindly at this game, regarding its exact mechanical contents, and experience it as an unspoiled, spontaneous adventure; I am just wondering if "preparing for a perfect pleasure" months earlier had terrible impact on my personality in particular, or if it is a symptom of more universal problem.

Besides, it is really rational behaviour, to plan for a game (a game, not a work project) months earlier when we don't know almost anything about its mechanics, beyond most fundamental basics?

I'm sorry to criticise, but I genuinely think such approaches are self damaging, and probably nobody would make this sort of comment here if not me.

 

[Elhoim]

had terrible impact on my personality in particular

Yeah, I really hope not to offend, but I think you are projecting a bit too much of your bad personal experience here. Imagining a bit a bit of different ways to play the game is fun for some people. Plus he's definitely not painstakingly and planning every detail of the game (like planning city districts), just a broad game idea to try out from a "role-playing" perspective. Kinda like thinking "When the next Elder Scrolls comes out I'm going to try a mage!".

I know I like to play Romans in Civ and similar games, and I'm definitely going to try a similar path to his (Myceneans, Romans, Byzantium, Spain, and hopefully some south american country, which probably won't be in at release) and a challenge run to take the Roman empire to the present age. And thinking that it's definitely not damaging in any way to my psyche.

BTW, I really support you in your way of approaching this game

 

[ehecatzin]

If this was civ I could have an expectation of the kind of victory I want to persue by choosing the civ alone. Here...I don't know if we can do that, or at least on the first game. Personally I want to play my first game with no plan, see the terrain and opponents and decide based on that.

 

[Elhoim]

If this was civ I could have an expectation of the kind of victory I want to persue by choosing the civ alone. Here...I don't know if we can do that, or at least on the first game. Personally I want to play my first game with no plan, see the terrain and opponents and decide based on that.

Yeah, after playing with Open Dev it's definitely interesting to mix different affinities and cultures to create "combos".

 

[TheSpaceCowboy]

It definitely doesn't tell a story or recapitulate real history or make mechanical sense with respect to gameplay, but this is my plan going into my first game:

• Ancient: Mycenaeans
• Classical: Greeks
• Medieval: Teutons
• Early Modern: Spanish
• Industrial: British
• Contemporary: America

In future games there are other culture lines I want to explore:

Mycenaeans -> Greeks -> Byzantine -> Ottomans -> Austro-Hungarians -> Turks
Phoenicians -> Romans -> Byzantines -> Venetians -> Italians
Goths -> Norsemen -> Poles -> Germans -> Swedes
Celts ->English -> ??? -> British -> Australians
Goths -> Franks -> Dutch -> French
Egyptians -> Carthaginians ->Umayyads -> Ottomans -> Persians -> Egyptians
Olmec -> Maya -> Aztecs -> Iroquois -> Mexicans -> Brazilians

 

[NombreyApellido]

i just want to play carthage... because PRETTY CITIES

I know I like to play Romans in Civ and similar games, and I'm definitely going to try a similar path to his (Myceneans, Romans, Byzantium, Spain, and hopefully some south american country, which probably won't be in at release)

amargo y retruco, carajo (?)

 

[Taefin]

I’m excited to see how Babylon > Greece > England > Endo Japan plays. It was a blast in Victor to see my units advance era after era and stave off the use of gunpowder just a little longer. Not sure where I’ll take it from there. Also not sure I’ll have the luxury of choosing since, I plan to start humankind difficulty so I don’t get half way through and end up as the only one with industrial/contemporary tech.

 

[KayAU]

I realise I am way behind everyone in terms of knowledge. I don't even know which civs are available and when, so I will be picking whatever feels best for me at the moment. I tend not to go for conquest however, so I expect to make choices along a peaceful builder route, with emphasis on science and culture, and defence as necessary. Which HK civs are going to suit someone who has the Maya as their favourite in Civ 6? I look forward to finding out.

 

[Siptah]

I realise I am way behind everyone in terms of knowledge. I don't even know which civs are available and when, so I will be picking whatever feels best for me at the moment. I tend not to go for conquest however, so I expect to make choices along a peaceful builder route, with emphasis on science and culture, and defence as necessary. Which HK civs are going to suit someone who has the Maya as their favourite in Civ 6? I look forward to finding out.

The official encyclopedia is online (the same as accessed from the game) if you want to expand your knowledge before playing.

Edit: removed link as I'm not sure if is supposed to be public.

 

[KayAU]

The official encyclopedia is online (the same as accessed from the game) if you want to expand your knowledge before playing: https://humankind-encyclopedia.games2gether.com/en-US

Thanks. Well, it certainly isn't going to be easy choosing even for just the first era, as a lot of these seem like they could fit my playstyle. Egypt and Babylon both look good for science and building...but Harappans seem to get better scouts and more food, which might be good for the early game. Then you have the Zhou, which seem to get both science and stability, which I suppose is also good for building the large cities I so desire.