Humankind: A challenger to Civilization

Which, if i understand correctly, is a slight disadvantage because you don't get the custom units for that era that a era-appropriate culture would provide. But not exactly a huge penalty.

You also don't get new legacy bonuses or emblematic quarters; on the other hand, transcending cultures gives you a boost to Fame which is, after all, your only victory condition in the game.

Anyways, personally I'm really hoping they tune the tech speeds a bit; other than that, as of the closed beta the game feels really good (with the earlier qualifier that 200 turns wasn't enough to get any further into the Industrial Era than a few turns, or to tech up beyond the Early Modern Era).
 
Anyways, personally I'm really hoping they tune the tech speeds a bit; other than that, as of the closed beta the game feels really good (with the earlier qualifier that 200 turns wasn't enough to get any further into the Industrial Era than a few turns, or to tech up beyond the Early Modern Era).
Considering I think the default turn limit is supposed to be ~ 350-450 turns, finishing up the early modern and entering the industrial fits perfectly, since that's about the halfway mark.

I do agree there might need to be some adjustment, just because the AI really just isn't agressive enough about attacking you. It's very easy to get away with greedy builds past early game, as at one point I noticed my strongest unit was the settler, which was pretty funny but something the AI absolutely should have taken advantage of. And I was on civilization difficulty, so the fact that I never got punished for not getting crossbows or pikes, really made diplomancy feel pointless, because I didn't avoid getting attacked by diplomacy, but rather just stopped paying attention, and never got attacked.

But I am looking forward to the multiplayer games my Civ group are going to have. Because it is going to be brutal warmongering for sure. With how fragile armies can be, and brutal even a minor tech advantage can be, and how important strategics are, I foresee some very very spicy games.

The biggest thing I'm wondering right now is whether the "extra" continent is a desired and default setting of the map gen. For those who don't know, to the far left of your start across the waters is an empty continent that primarily has independent people. It basically means the starting situation is the Terra map type from civ 6, something that doesn't work in civilization but I can see working much better in Humankind. Even so, the starting continent gets cramped pretty quickly, so I'm wondering if this is what the expect for the number of players to map size.

Worse case, you just up the map size and decrease the player number, but still.
 
Joseon Line Infantry slingshot is legit hilarious. I'm conquering entire nations with three, maybe six or eight units of line infantry which is more brutal when the enemy AI hasn't advanced in military tech at all... or even field obsolete musket units because they haven't even bothered to develop their saltpeter.
 
I'm surprised nobody posted the last culture. Might as well put it.



... You know, I keep seeing Gundam on the Robotics Lab even though it's not.
 
Last edited:
Again, for some reason they decide to use the Zero for Japan's unique unit despite it being trash tier after the opening months of the war.
 
Again, for some reason they decide to use the Zero for Japan's unique unit despite it being trash tier after the opening months of the war.
I'm not sure that's a fair assessment. Actually, I'm very sure that's a silly assessment.

Either the Zero falls to trash tier because the other side has rolled out the next gen fighters (Hellcat, Corsair) or it was always trash tier. It being suddenly trash tier after a few months doesn't really fit at all.

I'm pretty sure next gen fighters took more than just a few months, especially if we're talking full rollout, not just early prototypes making it to the theater. I can very much buy the "Once there's hellcats and corsairs around and lightnings are available in numbers, the Zero is outmatched" but again the timeline for that is probably over a year.

I can also buy "The Zero was always trash" because while it was brilliant design, it was brilliant design that came out of absolute garbage parameters. "We want a very high performance plane but also want to cheap out on the engines" is never good parameters. They got a very agile plane with excellent operational range, but with terrible combat endurance and extreme fragility, which one can argue was, on balance, garbage from the start.

"A few months in" just makes no sense to me though.
 
Again, for some reason they decide to use the Zero for Japan's unique unit despite it being trash tier after the opening months of the war.
Imagine how well Kamikaze planes would have gone down as a unique unit that western audiences would have heard of.
 
Japan's special plane is such unoriginal move. We should instead get something like cyber police or techno ninja. :V :V :V :V
 
I'm not sure that's a fair assessment. Actually, I'm very sure that's a silly assessment.

Either the Zero falls to trash tier because the other side has rolled out the next gen fighters (Hellcat, Corsair) or it was always trash tier. It being suddenly trash tier after a few months doesn't really fit at all.

I'm pretty sure next gen fighters took more than just a few months, especially if we're talking full rollout, not just early prototypes making it to the theater. I can very much buy the "Once there's hellcats and corsairs around and lightnings are available in numbers, the Zero is outmatched" but again the timeline for that is probably over a year.

I can also buy "The Zero was always trash" because while it was brilliant design, it was brilliant design that came out of absolute garbage parameters. "We want a very high performance plane but also want to cheap out on the engines" is never good parameters. They got a very agile plane with excellent operational range, but with terrible combat endurance and extreme fragility, which one can argue was, on balance, garbage from the start.

"A few months in" just makes no sense to me though.
Whatever the timescale was, the thing was getting mulched after the war started to turn against Japan. (Also I think the wildcat was able handle the Zero pretty well after they updated their tactics)

I just don't really think it did anywhere near well enough to justify being a unique unit.
 
Whatever the timescale was, the thing was getting mulched after the war started to turn against Japan. (Also I think the wildcat was able handle the Zero pretty well after they updated their tactics)

I just don't really think it did anywhere near well enough to justify being a unique unit.
The war turning against Japan was at least half a year in at the most generous. Not a few months.

Also updating tactics and doctrine isn't fast. The Thatch Weave was invented before the US (officialy) entered the war, but it wasn't significantly disseminated outside of like 1 squadron until well after Midway and took longer to become doctrine.

Again, I agree that the Zero's performance was nothing special - Japan mostly won spectacular early victories off of surprise, initiative, and an initially very skilled pilot cadre.

My point is that "a few months in" is nonsense. Pick either "A year to a year and a half in" or "It started as garbage" because either of those can be reasonably argued. "A few months" is videogame logic (where upgrades propagate instantly to every unit) and does not reflect operational realities.
 
Whatever the timescale was, the thing was getting mulched after the war started to turn against Japan. (Also I think the wildcat was able handle the Zero pretty well after they updated their tactics)

I just don't really think it did anywhere near well enough to justify being a unique unit.

Legitimate question: what would you put as their unique unit for modern japan instead?
 
Legitimate question: what would you put as their unique unit for modern japan instead?

They have some nice modern submarines they developed themselves. Or you could go with "Soryu class aircraft carrier" if you wanted something WW2 emblematic. Or destroyers armed with long lance torpedoes? or heck, pick their advanced carrier bomber designs.

there are options.
 
I think it's... really silly to have Japan, characterized as a high technology "Scientist" civilization here, have an emblematic unit from what is basically before the contemporary era (if we're taking it to mean Cold War to present).

The unique units for the era are...
  • The F-35 Lightning, representing the American military industrial complex and its love for foreign wars all over the globe supported by an expensive plane with the assumed mission goal of being able to do air superiority and bombing on anyone in the world.
  • The Australian All-Terrain PMV, representing that country's rugged terrain and the light supporting warfare they have mainly been involved with during this era.
  • Brazilian Jungle Brigades, drawing on that country's large pool of indigenous peoples and knowledge for fighting in their vast interior jungles as well as being the kind of elite infantry favored for their small policing wars.
  • China's "Guardian" missile launcher, based on real modern MLRS developments and their position as a strong regional power with advancing missile defenses and projection.
  • Sweden's Stealth Corvette, representing a unique light naval tactic for maintaining defense of the northern seas.
  • The SOM missile for Turkey, being a major domestic military-industrial achievement for a relatively small country and a major boon to the ability to conduct regional imperial expansion.
  • Peacekeepers for India, based on that country's strong presence in international institutions and experience in small, contentious territorial disputes.
Then there are odd units out from this majority of high tech, very contemporary unit selections, but which still make sense for the earlier Cold War part of the timespan.
  • Free Officers for Egypt, which, while very specific to the 1952 Revolution, are a good representation of the major political and social position of the military in modern Egypt.
  • A "Red Army Tank" modeled very obviously on the T-34 for the USSR, which while a piece of WW2 equipment was still kept in reserves well into the 1980s because it still had a potential use in filling out units and you don't waste that shit.
And then there's...
  • Modern Japan, supposedly one of the technologically focused factions, using a fighter used only by the IJN in WW2 and then not really associated with post-war Japan at all.
They would have been way better off picking one of the JMSDF's destroyers, or one of their unique tank or aircraft designs that have a level of worldwide recognition due to use in a lot of pop culture. The Zero is pretty goddamn baffling when you put it up in a comparison here.
 
Last edited:
Fun thing I've found for all that surplus influence past the land grab stage: detach attached territories and use the influence to instantly build harbors/extractors and then reattach the territory. Voila, lots of production/gold saved.
 
Huh.

My experience from beta is that you actually cannot get away with greed, and you basically have to wardec/rush at least one neighbour to secure borders and give yourself breathing room, because otherwise they will rush you.
Pretty chill after you secure enough power to 1v1 anyone else, but thats self evident, AI cannot into offensive alliances so far.

Early game feels way more brutal than Civ or Endless Legend, close to EU4 in terms of "eat or be eaten", and without looming Ming, France, PLC or Ottomans to make your life spicy after you snowball. Bit of a disappointment in this regard.
 
Now as the game is out I can say from experience: human-controlled Huns is Broken, please never nerf when I'm the one playing as them.

I've heard people saying this, but I'm not sure why- mind explaining?

Only been able to play a bit so far but I'm definitely liking the game.

Also, I'm legit wondering what's in store for expansions/
 
My biggest concern is that I don't feel like there's a sense of personality on anyone. If you bother to recall who is whom then it's probably by their faction colors rather then anything else.

The need for them to be able to be anything means that even the historical leaders don't seem to have much in the way of proper personality.
 
I've heard people saying this, but I'm not sure why- mind explaining?

Only been able to play a bit so far but I'm definitely liking the game.

Also, I'm legit wondering what's in store for expansions/
If I remember correctly, haven't played long enough to reach the huns yet, but the emblematic units for them and the mongols get the food mechanic from the neolithic era, the more they ransack the more they spawn.
 
I've heard people saying this, but I'm not sure why- mind explaining?

Only been able to play a bit so far but I'm definitely liking the game.

Also, I'm legit wondering what's in store for expansions/
If I remember correctly, haven't played long enough to reach the huns yet, but the emblematic units for them and the mongols get the food mechanic from the neolithic era, the more they ransack the more they spawn.
The food mechanic is just extra sauce.

Hunnic Horde (I think that was the name), Hun's emblematic unit, are range 1 archer cav that can move, fire and continue moving. This means they can cycle entire armies to concentrate fire on one or two units at a time.
Bottlenecks cannot be defended. Walls are almost no use. On offense the attacker attacks first, allowing them to kill at least one unit right at the start of combat, or seriously weaken multiple targets.

For all that, you only need a single horse strategic resource to marshal them.

Finally, the food mechanic means you can farm pop and then after the war (or when tech makes them too fragile to wield) you can disband them and turn cities into megapolises.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top