So, a dating system is often a thing that comes up with these sorts of games. I certainly don't know of any historical strategy games that don't have one, including the civilization series, which is the closest to what Humankind is doing.

Usually, either a dating system appropriate for the setting is used (like how Imperator Rome uses ab urbe condita) or the common BC/AD one is used for broader games (this is what civ does, for example). But in this sort of game, both options run into some minor issues. First of, there is no dating system that is completely fitting for a game about all of humanity, since humanity doesn't use a uniform dating system. BC/AD, ab urbe condita, dating from the Hijrah, etc., all are at least somewhat partial to a certain group's history. Because BC/AD or BCE/CE are so commonly used, certainly in the west, for talking about history, they can feel more natural but even there it gets weird when thinking about it.

On top of that, in a game like this it would be weird to use such datings based on specific historic events, as they might not happen. In any given game of Humankind, Jesus might not be born, Rome might not be founded and Mohammed might not go to Medina. It doesn't fit very well into the world's own developing history.

But a way of counting the years does seem like a necessity. With the events and the fame system it does seem like Humankind aims to give a playthrough a stronger sense of an evolving story throughout history and in my opinion dates are a part of that, so you can talk about when your people adopted this form of government or when your forces won this big battle, etc etc. To just leave it out and have a more abstract turn limit would feel out of place with that sense of history.

Some sort of calendar does seem necessary because of this, and I certainly wouldn't blame them for using an established one for ease of implementing. I'd like to propose a different system though, that would both allow the game to have a sense of years passing and would tie it in with the actual history of the world.

First, assign each turn a certain temporal value. Say, turn 150-151 is meant to be 10 years. Then, once a player founds their first city, the calendar starts counting those amounts of time per turn. Possibly the player could also choose to start a new calendar at big events, such as the adoption of a new culture or political system or the founding or a new religion.

This way, there's a way of dating events and measuring how your story progresses through time, while also having a dating system that feels appropriate to the game's history, as opposed to putting our history on top of this fictional one.

I think it would actually be cool if there was no calendar until calendar is invented, and at that point you choose how it is marked. Each Civilization would mark time on it's own terms. Perhaps later on with major religious or political revelations there would be an option to move the year "zero".

I think this would be great. I think the calendar is important, it changes our perspective of the history. Check out this Kurgezagt video about it

Eulogos wrote:

I think it would actually be cool if there was no calendar until calendar is invented, and at that point you choose how it is marked. Each Civilization would mark time on it's own terms. Perhaps later on with major religious or political revelations there would be an option to move the year "zero".

I agree on that, either our own calendar should be created with significant event or existing calendar should be unlocked with the calendar technology, you could choose the calendar you want and if you're influent enough people start adopting it or something along those lines. 

If I remember correctly there is a civic you choose early on whether you want a lunar or solar calendar.

If I had to make a guess at the Calendar, given 7 Eras in a 300 turn game based on certain assumptions: Ancient Era starts at 3000 BC the beginning of the Bronze Era and last Era before present day lasted until roughly 2000 AD, then that 5000 years for 6 Eras means each average Era lasts 2500/3 years.  However, the last Era seems to be ~1/10 that in years.  So, the general idea is: 0.1+...+term(6)=6 Eras.  So, that could look like this approximately, going backwards in time:  Era 1 = e^x, where x = -LN(21/2).  Era 2 = e^(x+LN(2)).  Era 3 = e^(x+2LN(2))+...+Era 6 = e^(x+5LN(2)).  That translates into: Era 1 = (2/21)*(2500/3) years, Era 2 = (4/21)*(2500/3) years, Era 3 = (8/21)*(2500/3) years, ... Era 6 = (64/21)*(2500/3) years.

So, here's my rough Guess at years in Era Turns:

Contemperary Era = 80 years.  (50 game turns)
Industrial Era = 160 years.  (50 game turns)

Early Modern Era = 320 years.  (50 game turns)

Medieval Era = 640 years.  (50 game turns)

Classical Era = 1280 years.  (50 game turns)

Ancient Era = 2560 years.  (50 game turns)

+Neolithic Era (Bonus) - might last an extra 10 turns from estimate.

The math isn't exact, but the general idea is there.  :)

What if "calendar refinements" or resets occured throughout the game upon hitting various benchmarks, unlocking techs, advancing eras, or other mechanisms.  And what if those refinements confered greater bonuses - more movement, more actions, faster development/production, etc.  Essentially creating a mechanism whereby civilizations operating on older, less accurate, calendar systems simply aren't "moving" quite as fast as your civilization and visa versa?  Of course battles would still have to be resolved without such benefits, but operating with different perceptions of time has in fact created huge advantages from everything like when to plant and harvest, population growth, worker productivity, etc.  

The calendar is just a representation of time, but I think what you are getting at unlocks mechanisms that consider how turns can represent different spans of time and how one player's turn my represent something different, at different points in the game's progression, than another player's/AI's turn.

Progress wrote:

If I had to make a guess at the Calendar, given 7 Eras in a 300 turn game based on certain assumptions: Ancient Era starts at 3000 BC the beginning of the Bronze Era and last Era before present day lasted until roughly 2000 AD, then that 5000 years for 6 Eras means each average Era lasts 2500/3 years.  However, the last Era seems to be ~1/10 that in years.  So, the general idea is: 0.1+...+term(6)=6 Eras.  So, that could look like this approximately, going backwards in time:  Era 1 = e^x, where x = -LN(21/2).  Era 2 = e^(x+LN(2)).  Era 3 = e^(x+2LN(2))+...+Era 6 = e^(x+5LN(2)).  That translates into: Era 1 = (2/21)*(2500/3) years, Era 2 = (4/21)*(2500/3) years, Era 3 = (8/21)*(2500/3) years, ... Era 6 = (64/21)*(2500/3) years.

So, here's my rough Guess at years in Era Turns:

Contemperary Era = 80 years.  (50 game turns)
Industrial Era = 160 years.  (50 game turns)

Early Modern Era = 320 years.  (50 game turns)

Medieval Era = 640 years.  (50 game turns)

Classical Era = 1280 years.  (50 game turns)

Ancient Era = 2560 years.  (50 game turns)

+Neolithic Era (Bonus) - might last an extra 10 turns from estimate.

The math isn't exact, but the general idea is there.  :)

I like that basic idea... but Eras are more fluid (different Era per civilization)

So something Where the "Calendar year" and Era civilizations were in determined the Years/Turn

(so if your world is ahead in Eras the Calendar would try to catch up, and if you are behind, the Calendar would slow down)

Those would be the baselines if all Civilizations 

Krikkitone wrote:

Progress wrote:

If I had to make a guess at the Calendar, given 7 Eras in a 300 turn game based on certain assumptions: Ancient Era starts at 3000 BC the beginning of the Bronze Era and last Era before present day lasted until roughly 2000 AD, then that 5000 years for 6 Eras means each average Era lasts 2500/3 years.  However, the last Era seems to be ~1/10 that in years.  So, the general idea is: 0.1+...+term(6)=6 Eras.  So, that could look like this approximately, going backwards in time:  Era 1 = e^x, where x = -LN(21/2).  Era 2 = e^(x+LN(2)).  Era 3 = e^(x+2LN(2))+...+Era 6 = e^(x+5LN(2)).  That translates into: Era 1 = (2/21)*(2500/3) years, Era 2 = (4/21)*(2500/3) years, Era 3 = (8/21)*(2500/3) years, ... Era 6 = (64/21)*(2500/3) years.

So, here's my rough Guess at years in Era Turns:

Contemperary Era = 80 years.  (50 game turns)
Industrial Era = 160 years.  (50 game turns)

Early Modern Era = 320 years.  (50 game turns)

Medieval Era = 640 years.  (50 game turns)

Classical Era = 1280 years.  (50 game turns)

Ancient Era = 2560 years.  (50 game turns)

+Neolithic Era (Bonus) - might last an extra 10 turns from estimate.

The math isn't exact, but the general idea is there.  :)

I like that basic idea... but Eras are more fluid (different Era per civilization)

So something Where the "Calendar year" and Era civilizations were in determined the Years/Turn

(so if your world is ahead in Eras the Calendar would try to catch up, and if you are behind, the Calendar would slow down)

Those would be the baselines if all Civilizations 

			Years per turn (Era of most civs)
	Calendar Year	Target Era	Lower than target	Target	Higher than target
2	1950-2050	Contemporary	1	2
5	1700-1950	Industrial	3	5	7
10	1200-1700	Modern	7	10	15
15	450-1200	Mideval	10	15	20
20	550BC-450CE	Classical	15	20	30
50	3050BC-550BC	Ancient		50	70

What if each of the 7 Eras target had 40 game turns, for easy math in my system, and the leftover 20 turns took it beyond the millennium, so the game could go beyond present day to end in 2040 going at the pace of the Contemporary Era?  Also, what if the Neolitic Era was shortened by 30 game turns, and the Contemporary Era was lengthened by 30 game turns from it, 2100 to make it fit the game even better?  Then, I like your idea of Targets.  How about this math below?  If Lower than Target then next Era up (half years per turn).  If Higher than Target then previous Era down.  (double years per turn), using your idea, but with a simple double or half rule.

So, the proposed system would look like:

Contemporary Era Target (90 turns) = 2 years per Turn.  (1920 - 2100).

Industrial Era Target (40 turns) = 4 years per Turn.  (1760 - 1920).

Early Modern Era Target (40 turns) = 8 years per Turn.  (1440 - 1760).

Medieval Era Target (40 turns) = 16 years per Turn.  (800 - 1440).

Classical Era Target (40 turns) = 32 years per Turn.  (480 BC - 800).

Ancient Era Target (40 turns) = 64 years per Turn.  (3040 BC - 480 BC).

Neolithic Era Target (10 turns) = 128 years per Turn.  (4320 BC - 3040 BC).

I like this approximation a lot.  If it could start at 4000 BC, it would be right on the money I feel, without comprimsing the upside.  This calander starts earlier and ends later, it seems, but I believe its within bounds.  What do you think?  :)

One thought with differing timelines is syncronizing game turns to a standard Contemporary Era game turn.  Contemporary turns seem like micro turns compared to one big Neolithic Era turn.

So, How many actions per Contemporary Era turn should each Era get, given years go by longer leaps at the bottom?

Contemporary Era gets 1 actions per every 1 Contemporary Era turns.

Industrial Era gets 1 actions per every 2 Contemporary Era turns.

Early Modern Era gets 1 actions per every 4 Contemporary Era turns.

Medieval Era gets 1 actions per every 8 Contemporary Era turns.

Classical Era gets 1 action per every 16 Contemporary Era turns.

Ancient Era gets 1 action per every 32 Contemporary Era turns.

Neolithic Era gets 1 action per every 64 Contemporary Era turns.

Another thought I had, is fine-tuning the target timeline.  One way to cut down the scope the timeline by 50 years.

21st century = 1 year per turn.  Double the actions if the Contemporary Era has been completed.  So, the game would end in 2050, and each Era target is still 40 turns long, with the exception of the Neolithic, being 10 turns to target.

Krikkitone wrote:
(so you would research Calendar tech and suddenly find out it is 2432 BC)

The year can be displayed, instead of the turn number when Calendar tech is researched.  I like that idea.

Well ending on 2050 would be a little hard given that this system varies the years/turn deoending on the state of the game, So I don't think it works to "nicely round off" numbers as much

But, I do like the idea of taking 12 out for Neolithic

So... method for calculating the year that can be displayed (but is only displayed with the Calendar tech)

Start

turn 0=4768 BC

4768 BC - 928 BC add 64 years/turn, double if world is Classical+

928 BC-608 AD add 32 years/turn, double if world is Medieval+, half if world is Ancient-

608-1376 add 16 years/turn, double if world is Modern+, half if world is Classical-

1376-1760 add 8 years/turn, double if world is Industrial+, half if world is Medieval-

1760-1952 add 4 years/turn, double if world is Contemporary+, half if world is Modern-

1952-> add 2 years/turn, half if world is Industrial-

Krikkitone wrote:

Start

turn 0=4768 BC

4768 BC - 928 BC add 64 years/turn, double if world is Classical+

928 BC-608 AD add 32 years/turn, double if world is Medieval+, half if world is Ancient-

608-1376 add 16 years/turn, double if world is Modern+, half if world is Classical-

1376-1760 add 8 years/turn, double if world is Industrial+, half if world is Medieval-

1760-1952 add 4 years/turn, double if world is Contemporary+, half if world is Modern-

1952-> add 2 years/turn, half if world is Industrial-

Why not do the same thing for the Neolithic Era as the other Eras?  Why did you include the Neolitihic Era in the Ancient Era?  Even though the 12 turns would be unseen (pre 4000 BC), until Calandar is researched, it matters because its a recognized Era.  Should the Calandar speed be able to double if the World is Ancient during those "should be" game turns while the player is still Neolithic, following the pattern?  I assume the point of speeding up or slowing down Calander function would make it so the game would end earlier on the timeline if the player is ahead compared to the average world on the should be timeline, and the game would end later on the timeline if the player is behind compared to the average world on the should be timeline.  Otherwise 300 turns is just 300 turns of gameplay.

Krikkitone wrote:

If the civilizations in the world are very slow to advance eras, then the years/turn will be greater and turn 300 could be 2073 AD.

If the civilizations in the world are very fast to advance eras, then the years/turn will be less and turn 300 could be 2025 AD.

So, that bascially means:  On easier than average difficulities, the world on average would be slower, so the end date would be later.  On harder than average difficulties, the world would be faster, so the end date would be sooner.  Also, being that this is a global calander, shouldn't the average Era for the world be a weighted average of each Era they are all in, rounded up to the nearest year?  So, if 3 are in Neolithic, 2 are in Ancient, and 1 is in Classical, then the average Era for the calendar calculation for the world would be (128*3+64*2+32*1)/6, rounded up would be 91 years/turn.  Also, what if a player is eliminated - does that eliminate them from the weighted average, so the timeline would probably go by faster if that eliminated player was probably lagging behind?

Yup, I do agree that there should be more depth than a simple lunar/solar calendar. Perhaps just how the gregorian calender won out, we could have a worldwide event with  global trade and idea spread causing other civs to adopt the calander of the culture with the highest science/culture, giving a slight edge to culture and science, while those who stick with the old calender get one to stability and millitary bonus(due to traditionalist elements strenghened)

You're working backwards which is messing up your calendar. Either your eras are the wrong age, or you have a crazy high number of turns per era. A standard game, at least currently, lasts 300 turns. The calendar would be more like:

Ancient Era 3500BC - 1000BC; 50 year turn, 50 turns

Classical Era 1000BC - 500AD; 30 year turn, 50 turns

Medieval Era 500AD- 1500AD; 20 year turn, 50 turns

Early Modern Era 1500AD - 1850AD; 7 year turn, 50 turns

Industrial Era 1850AD - 1925AD; 2.5 year turn, 50 turns

Contemporary Era 1925AD - 2025AD; 2 year turn, 50 turns

Eulogos wrote:

Ancient Era 3500BC - 1000BC; 50 year turn, 50 turns

Classical Era 1000BC - 500AD; 30 year turn, 50 turns

Medieval Era 500AD- 1500AD; 20 year turn, 50 turns

Early Modern Era 1500AD - 1850AD; 7 year turn, 50 turns

Industrial Era 1850AD - 1925AD; 2.5 year turn, 50 turns

Contemporary Era 1925AD - 2025AD; 2 year turn, 50 turns

I think your timeline seems a bit more historically acurate, but I'd like to fine-tune it, using the double year per Era adjustment.  So, if you notice, not all Eras are the same in turns, the Medival Era is 60 turns, taking 5 away from the Industrial and the Early Modern Era, and the Ancient Era is a shorter 40 turns, where the Neolithic Era is now included with the leftover of 10 turns from the Ancient, and the total is a perfect 300 turns.

Contemporary Era (2 yr/turn) = 1920 - 2020.  (50 turns) - difference of 5 years earlier.

Industrial Era (4 yr/turn) = 1840 - 1920.  (45 turns) - difference of 10 years earlier.

Early Modern Era (8 yr/turn) = 1480 - 1840 (45 turns) - difference of 20 years earlier.

Medieval Era (16 yr/turn) = 520 - 1480 (60 turns) - difference of 20 years later.  (central approximation for your timeline).

Classical Era (32 yr/turn) = 1080 BC - 520 AD (50 turns) - difference of 80 years earlier.

Ancient Era (64 yr/turn) = 3640 BC - 1080 BC (40 turns) - difference of 140 years earlier.

Neolithic Era (128 yr/turn) = 4920 BC - 3640 BC (leftover = 10 turns) - calendar not displayed, until next Era.

Eulogos wrote:
Why double years though? Do you have any reason to consider that accurate?

The approximation works, not exactly, but reasonably close while keeping the years/turn in each Era the same.  The later thought you had about 35 years per turn and subtracting a year off it every 8 turns isn't level per Era.

Eulogos wrote:
My original proposal was intended to keep to 50 turns per era, so that pacing is ball-park correct if the game is balanced well.

Yes, but the game is balanced even better if 10 turns for the Neolithic Era + 40 turns for the Ancient Era, was an average Era in terms of turns.  Also, historically, given the slow progress made in the Medieval time frame, it makes sense that would be longer by 10 turns, coming from the next 2 Eras, (Reason: the Dark ages containing the plague) catching up to the average pace of 50 turns per Era in the Contemporary Era.  So, Its well-balanced within 10 turns for both cases.

Another point, unmentioned after the standard timeline is loosely approximated:  Should there be a dynamic timeline because of the difference of Empires reaching different ages at different times?

Honestly, reading this whole discussion, I'm more and more convinced that we shouldn't be using BC/AD dates based on our timeline at all. Considering all the math that goes into making it feel okay I'm not sure it's worth it. On top of that, we aren't simulating earth's history after all. You can say that the middle ages in our timeline had slower progress (something which historians can of course argue about till we're blue in the face) but there's no reason why our middle ages should be like the middle ages on earth.

So I'm just going to reiterate my proposal of having each turn represent a certain amount of time (maybe still loosely in pace with the time length of our eras, since they're taken from our timeline, but not too much) and having how it's counted be dependent on decisions (at first counting from settlement for example, or then later counting from the founding of a religion). Of course, I'm not a programmer so maybe that's even more fiddly to implement than all the above calculations.

Alice99 wrote:
Honestly, reading this whole discussion, I'm more and more convinced that we shouldn't be using BC/AD dates based on our timeline at all. Considering all the math that goes into making it feel okay I'm not sure it's worth it. On top of that, we aren't simulating earth's history after all.

What if they could simulate Earth's history, loosely, by playtesting 1 Era at a time, while not considering the stacking combinations of the previous Eras to get to that point - would you be in favor of that?

Alice99 wrote:
You can say that the middle ages in our timeline had slower progress (something which historians can of course argue about till we're blue in the face) but there's no reason why our middle ages should be like the middle ages on earth.

So, the boubonic plague, killing off 1/3 of Europe's population (it really was that significant) can be bypassed?  How would the in-game events do this?  The other warring cultures of the Dark Ages can also be bypassed?  And, what of the crusades - How would that in game event hypothetically be handled?  Slower progress from this Era to the next is realistic, not that history should have happened this way.  Also, is 10 turns a reasonable amount of time to rebuild population and replenish resources consumed by producing war units to what it should be, being ready for the next Era statistically?  Remember, in Humankind, war units also take up population too in the calculation.

Alice99 wrote:
So I'm just going to reiterate my proposal of having each turn represent a certain amount of time

I know you said about the math, and the feel, making it so its not worth it so much, but that is how this goal is achieved I believe.  I do like this thought, suggestion of yours above.  But, then, there's the How - Should it be roughly the same number of turns making perfect math per Era or exactly the same turns for Era, making imperfect math, knowing when one is exact the math for the other one isn't?  Maybe, its possible just like there's a Solar vs Lunar calander, there's also different ways of figuring this one out too.  I hope the computer programmers can take this thread input and make some good sense from it, based on their game design finding the math they feel works for their scenarios the best, which I am excited to try when it comes out, even if the math, turns, and the timelines are horrible!

So, the boubonic plague, killing off 1/3 of Europe's population (it really was that significant) can be bypassed?  How would the in-game events do this?  The other warring cultures of the Dark Ages can also be bypassed?  And, what of the crusades - How would that in game event hypothetically be handled?  Slower progress from this Era to the next is realistic, not that history should have happened this way.  Also, is 10 turns a reasonable amount of time to rebuild population and replenish resources consumed by producing war units to what it should be, being ready for the next Era statistically?  Remember, in Humankind, war units also take up population too in the calculation.

Well, those aren't handled. They've said so before but they're not modelling specific historical events at specific times. The most you have is mechanics and events inspired by them but they're not meant to be those specific events. For example, there's a war grievance based on religion. But there's no specific crusades in the game, and nothing says holy wars should happen in the middle ages and not in the classical era or early modern. Same for the bubonic plague. So there's no reason for progress in this era to be slower than the others, beyond if you want to model it being 1000 years long (which goes for the classical era as well anyway). I don't think 10 turns should be how long the era is, but I'd say depending on your situation 10-15 should be good enough time to recover, if the war wasn''t too destructive. Also, of course, you're likely carrying armies over from the previous era anyway, not just buidling them all in the middle ages.

I know you said about the math, and the feel, making it so its not worth it so much, but that is how this goal is achieved I believe.  I do like this thought, suggestion of yours above.  But, then, there's the How - Should it be roughly the same number of turns making perfect math per Era or exactly the same turns for Era, making imperfect math, knowing when one is exact the math for the other one isn't?  Maybe, its possible just like there's a Solar vs Lunar calander, there's also different ways of figuring this one out too.  I hope the computer programmers can take this thread input and make some good sense from it, based on their game design finding the math they feel works for their scenarios the best, which I am excited to try when it comes out, even if the math, turns, and the timelines are horrible!

Take how many turns an average game takes, take how many years you want in the game. Then check how much time an average era takes in the VIP games. And then you can allocate the time to turns to have it roughly be on the same scale as we experienced those eras. And if the game goes a bit shorter, or a bit longer, that won't be a problem because on a fictional timeline there won't be much of a sense of being "behind" or "ahead."

Alice99 wrote:

... check how much time an average era takes in the VIP games...

They don't have access to VIP builds. Also average time depends on a few factors, such as if you happen to be PARAdoxiBLE...