Until they resolve the severe FIMS imbalance after you hit medieval, and war resolution/surrender, the game is junk.

Dale_K wrote:

the game is junk.

You must have an impressive hateboner, to dislike game so much yet regularly visit forums and write about it.

The main new element of the game (changing cultures throughout history) was a great idea and I loved it from day one.

You can tell it was rushed due to the huge amount of bug fixes we keep seeing in every patch notes post, and that's a shame because it stopped many players from really enjoying the game.

For my personal taste, they only need to balance the game better, so that we stop having some cultures that are way stronger than others in pretty much every possible map. I can see they are going in the right direction (some Khmer nerfes, for example, have already been done), and hopefully they'll get it right eventually (it took CIV 6 a long time to fix Georgia, Khmer, etc.). Apart from that, the vassal system needs some improvement so it's actually worth it to get a vassal, and the war resolution score might need some adjustment too. 

Overall the game is good right now, but it has the potential to be great very soon, with just a few adjustaments here and there.

The game has some very good new elements. I like most of the new concepts, and it was really refreshing to play such a civ-like game like Humankind.

Unfortunately, there are some points that makes me dislike the game:

- Culture and religion: basically, you just need to build 1 religious temple to convert every other civ. Pick up 1 cultural civ to convert all other civs to your culture. Both concepts needs refinement.

- Combat: very cool combat system, but once you reach modern era, most fight zone can cover the whole of the map, which is a total non-sense.

- The adjustments made to the cost of building new quarters. For me, the new solution still looks like a small bandage that doesn't improve the initial solution.

- Playing against "pink" or "yellow" civs. They have created Avatars, but the change of civs during the game makes us lose track of the overall history within the game. Every game, we are always like "hm, yellow player is getting strong" instead of "Greeks are getting strong, or Gilgamesh Greek empire is getting strong".

- Releasing the game with a space victory condition that doesn't work on release is a total shame. I had played 2 games trying to win the space race, every time I thought I had done something wrong. I then went on forums to find out that "yeah, its normal, the space race is bugged and doesn't work". I lost a few dozen of hours, and I will never forgive the developers for this. To release a game with win conditions that doesn't work on release is unacceptable from my point of view.

- I don't like the achievements system. I don't do them. For me, they look more like "we are aware our game has some serious calibration problems, but keep playing it by trying to reach the achievements". If a game is really good, it doesn't need all those achievements to push players to play the game. I know some players like to get those achievements, but they are a minority.

- Multi player.... Im not even commenting.

- Diplomacy and win conditions on war. Good attempt, but total fail.

- with latest version, I got 2 games where I was stuck on non-ending turn. No matter which save I reload, it always block. This is the point that makes me stop playing humankind...for now.

I really hope the devs will be able to calibrate this game. As many said, it has a lot of potentials. But it needs serious testing and refinement.

Sublustris wrote:

Dale_K wrote:

the game is junk.

You must have an impressive hateboner, to dislike game so much yet regularly visit forums and write about it.

How I choose to spend my time, is my business, not yours. But if you MUST have an answer, I spent good money on this game. Spent good time in the opendevs, betas and release version of the game. I have submitted reams of suggestions, game reports, bug submissions and design ideas to the team over the last year or so. I am very invested in this game, and I really do want successful alternatives to Civ, which will encourage much better games in the genre of game I love playing (including Civ).

I also feel like I need to provide a counter-point to the fawning fanboi echo chamber that exists here. If all Amplitude get is fawning and pats on the back, then they will believe their game doesn't require fixing. Yet the fact that 95% of players have left the game already after a few short months is immense evidence of a colossal game failure.

Weird choice on how to invest your time and energy, but ok. What is the severe FIMS imbalance after you hit medieval? How does it play out?

JerryDrake wrote:

What is the severe FIMS imbalance after you hit medieval? How does it play out?

Single focus on production till end of medieval, then single focus on science. Results in severe snowball and science ballooning.

I had fun when it first came out (and open devs) and still having fun now.

As others have said, there are some issues, but that doesn't prevent me from having fun playing it.

As others have said, there's really only one strategy to win, BUT YOU DON"T HAVE TO DO THAT. Play how you want. If you focus on science early, you'll be nerfed. Who cares? You can still do it. You don't always have to min-max everything. It's a single player game, there's no monetary rewards. So the only benefit to playing is to have fun.

speaking of the sience victory, I always turn it down as a victory condition in my runs, and that's it, problem solved, if someone wants a legit scientific run? go to mars, but forget the "make every sience to win" run

Sublustris wrote:

I understand your investment, but that attitude isn't going to help. Just because game deserves criticism (and it does) doesn't mean you should scream louder then others, or went out in rude way. You'll be left severely disappointed in the end.

I think you'll find that rather than be rude, I have explained issues, answered questions, and even supported certain parts of the game (ie: the first phase is great!). Yes, I'm an abrasive Aussie who speaks his mind. Yes, I speak passionately and colourfully. But I've only ever discussed the game and how it functions. And believe me, I have not been "screaming louder than others" as you put it. There's plenty of other people here who could fill that position. :)

On the other hand, I have regularly had personal comments directed at me in response to my posts. I've been told to shut up, go away, and even that I play the game the wrong way (though I don't see how "wanting to play comp-stomps which I find fun" is playing the game the wrong way, since that is how I have fun with these types of games). Oh, I've also been told my opinion is irrelevant because that's not how the other person believes the game should be.

But you know what? Rather than whinge about those posts I pull up my big boy panties, because I'm an adult, and ignore them. And keep saying my feedback and what I find flaws in the game design. :)

I was hesitant to return to it, after the initial hype and spending almost whole days playing it, I ended up buying soundtrack and blasting that through speakers more often than actually playing the game, but after last patches I think the spark that got me replaying the OpenDevs until I just couldn't stand those maps is back. For the first time since release I'm once again playing one more turn until my laptop is no longer capable of handling it and narrator turns to eldritch screaming, rather than closing the game after ~30 turns thinking 'all right, that's enough for today'.

That being said, the game is still rough around the edges and I'm glad to see it being actively worked on, maybe less glad that it means the ES2 patch won't be around anytime soon. It's still a long way to go, though, they really need to patch things up to serviceable status and then take five, six months to roll out proper fixes and rebalancing, with its own assets, rather than keep trying to shuffle stuff around. Really seems like a decision to keep some things under the carpet until release was sound from marketing's perspective, but the game suffered without a late game OpenDev and then another, full 300 turns one, so that people could get a feeling for a whole playthrough.

I like the culture combos and the easy city management (no need to manage too much cities).

With mods, the game is very good.

Dev team make regular updates about bug fixes and add some other improvements, so it's nice and slowly get better and better.

Sublustris wrote:
You must have an impressive hateboner, to dislike game so much yet regularly visit forums and write about it.

Yeah, nobody is allowed to post on the forums unless it's to praise the game. That's exactly how games improve.

Scheneighnay wrote:

Yeah, I find pacing to be pretty bad as well, definitely needs a patch to keep everything even.

Standard mode is a bit smoother, but on Endless as well you get era stars significantly faster than you can progress scientifically or build anything.

You can easily reach medieval cultures while you're still in the bronze age technologically.

Totally agree. Pacing need serious improvements. Right now, it just break the immersion level when your opponents are in industry era but they attack you with swordsmen.