Please can we have this I know you devs do your best but sometimes in a strategy game the autogen maps just screw you over and you want to restart, but going back through the menus is tedious. This can be especially troublesome if you're trying to get a specific start in order to go for a type of achievement or as a theme for Roleplay. As such adding a restart buttton like Civ used to have would be  wonderful quality of life feature and be most helpful. I hope that by pointing this out during the development phase you could do it more easily. Thanks for the consideration of reading this and good luck on the game. 
P.S. If the game already has something like this I appologize for wasting time.

I would be inclined to agree. If this is not already a feature easily accessible from the esc menu, it certainly should be. I remember playing Civ VI and playing as Brazil, getting very few rainforest tiles around my start. My whole plan rested upon those rainforests. Having to quite the game, then start a new game, setting up the game in the exact same way, is exceedinly monotonous. A simple button within the esc menu which regenerates the world under the same conditions selected previously would be life saving (maybe not quite).

protossman12 wrote:

I would be inclined to agree. If this is not already a feature easily accessible from the esc menu, it certainly should be. I remember playing Civ VI and playing as Brazil, getting very few rainforest tiles around my start. My whole plan rested upon those rainforests. Having to quite the game, then start a new game, setting up the game in the exact same way, is exceedinly monotonous. A simple button within the esc menu which regenerates the world under the same conditions selected previously would be life saving (maybe not quite).

The following doesn't speak against a restart button, but that shouldn't happen in HK since you can pick your culture after seeing the surrounding area. :)

HBumblebee wrote:

protossman12 wrote:

I would be inclined to agree. If this is not already a feature easily accessible from the esc menu, it certainly should be. I remember playing Civ VI and playing as Brazil, getting very few rainforest tiles around my start. My whole plan rested upon those rainforests. Having to quite the game, then start a new game, setting up the game in the exact same way, is exceedinly monotonous. A simple button within the esc menu which regenerates the world under the same conditions selected previously would be life saving (maybe not quite).

The following doesn't speak against a restart button, but that shouldn't happen in HK since you can pick your culture after seeing the surrounding area. :)

Thanks for you reply! 

If we go into games to decide our journey -  and as such the cultures we choose -  after seeing the surrounding area, then certainly it should not be extremely important. 

However, some people go into games with a certain playstyle in mind, and as such certain cultures and ideologies they already want to follow. 

Hope this helps explain my reasoning for supporting the restart button in HK. Cheers! 

The Games already have a Quickstart menu which replicates the previous settings, however it it only accessible by going back to the main menu. Maybe you have faster computers but for my the loading screens take almost 6 min each and you have to go though 3 every time you restart from the main menu. Adding in a button from the esc menu would save lots of time and make singleplayer more tolerable. 

They've also addressed this problem with another mechanism: the neolithic era. When you start the game you have a tribe which wanders and explores, gathers and hunts. After some time you pick a spot and a culture and begin your first city. This means you can choose your start location without needing to restart or be penalized by starting late. They are still fiddling with some of the particulars of neolithic to make last long enough to be useful, but not so long that it becomes boring. This significantly reduces the need to restart since you can find usually find a nice enough spot and choose a culture that matches it. If you find an area with a lot of rivers you might chose Harappan or Olmec because they get bonuses from rivers, but if you don't find rivers then you know not to choose those cultures.

Eulogos wrote:
They are still fiddling with some of the particulars of neolithic to make last long enough to be useful, but not so long that it becomes boring.

Aside from a Fame bonus (which aside from score and being a winner at the end for the most, i don't know what it accomplishes) and flexibility of choices for the next Era, what are the advantages of staying in a previous Era longer than necessary?  Staying in the Neolithic Era for too long would miss out on the advantages of the culture chosen for the Ancient Age.  However, the choice might be best just before the choice of building or using the 1st Emblemic unit/building/ability, being able to scout around, seeing everything around.  How long should the Neolithic Era last on average before the benfits outweigh the flexibility of selecting a culture choice based on the resources around you?

I can't answer that specifically without breaking NDA. I will say that they have changed how it works as they try to find something that feels right. You're welcome to speculate or put your opinion on how you think it aught to be.

Eulogos wrote:
You're welcome to speculate or put your opinion on how you think it aught to be.

How should it aught to be?

Eventually, the decision to go into the next age should be better and better as the turn key is pressed, imo.  But, still the question lingers - why stay in a Neolithic or Ancient Era longer before going into the next future age?  The only thing that would keep someone is fame.  Why is fame important, aside from winning and score?  So, what if fame also acted as a weak buff to everything?  Then, the tradeoff of something better (a leap) is compared to the weak buff, cummaltive benefit would be considered.  That would be cool if that was it.  But, still it would have to be understood, the tradeoff, or have a good feel for, if such a system.

Waykot wrote:
Or you have a strategy in mind, you want to be able to choose your next culture before anyone else picks it.

That would certainly cut down 10^6, or one million CIV possibilities to choose from down the road if you're not 1st to select it, if that's the case (I hope not).  If the last to select it, because of claiming the most fame in the previous eras, there's always just only 1 choice to consider instead of 1 million.  I like having options to consider.  I think claiming wonders of the world makes sense, denying others that opportunity if 1st with culture points, but being the 1st to claim a specific CIV shouldn't deny your opponent of a "mirror match" imo.  If one Neolithic tribe finds a good river one turn later than another culture half-way around the world, should that deny them of the Harappans selection, for example?  Maybe, if claiming a culture was equated to claiming a wonder of the world, with stored influence points, that consideration should be made.  Then, that choice can be weighed against other choices, so there is compensation for being 1 turn too late because instead of the culture leap, there's other primitive more advantages that a Neolithic culture could have, if half-way around the world unduely rushed too quickily into their CIV.

Waykot wrote:
You're only starting to generate influence in Ancient Era, after having picked your first culture and founded your first city.

So, that's an even greater incentive to be hasty and rush to a specific culture instead of considering the tradeoff, which should be considered imo, of staying in the Neolithic Era.

Waykot wrote:
But the main point is that currently (again, this is still a WIP, as far as I know), there is a maximum of 8 players ingame. So if you're the last to pick your culture, you'd still have 3 choices : 2 new cultures or transcending your own. And even if there were actually 10 players ingame, you'd still have 2 choices if you were the last to pick : 1 new culture or transcend your own.

What is put at stake for claiming yourself while denying opponent a specific culture opportunity?  If its not influence, then what - is it just missed opportunities (inner stars) for fame scoring?  imo, there should be something put at stake for something competitive, just like a wonder of the world!  The fact that there are players in game simply makes things more competitve.  If there's nothing put at stake, not even influence, that's another reason to hastily rush to a specific culture 1st instead of investing in something truly fabulous, like an Ancient culture out of a Neolithic one.  Are there any bad consequences for the player who hastily claims the cuture as soon as possible compared to one who optimally claims the lesser than best choice 10 turns later?  This is especially important in the early stages of the game to figure out, because everyone will be doing it at roughly the same time.  Its possible that, hasty selected cultures, although having less total Fame, would be more competitive later in the ways they gained their benefits from claiming culture, unless the inner stars were like a Veterancy system, bettering that specific field, still remaining competitive up to the point of 21 stars, although trying to earn stars in any field that is already full (3 stars) in that system would be an inefficency, not earning stars.  So, conceptually, when a player realizes there is nothing to gain in any field - they should want to consider the next Era more and more, or Transcend their last Era thing if all the good choices are taken.

Waykot wrote:
What would you consider as an incentive to stay longer in the Neolithic Era, where you can't build or do anything, apart from scouting and grabbing small amounts of food, money and science ?

I'd consider Veterancy of inner stars a reward to stay longer than needed to a point.  If there's no Veterancy of Stars, just being earned inner stars instead, then fame score is not incentive enough, Id think because of the snowball effect of grabbing a culture ASAP.  I'm not against snowballing an advantage at the right time - there should just be a clear advantage to snowball 1st, before doing so, imo, not just because its advantageous to do it just because it should be done ASAP without any short-term considerations 1st.  Obviously, staying in the Neolithic Age forever should be a Disadvantage, competitively due to cheap opportunties to up their Fame, Veterancy of basic things, or whatever.  I'd like to see a system where the best average decision to do the next Era is at 14 stars, where 7 stars is when it should be considered for the advantages it would bring, and 21 stars, being a perfectionist would statistically be too late, but has some merit because of the idea of Cheap Veterancy.

Waykot wrote:
Well, I'd say the whole point of the game (of every game) is to win, right ?

Absolutely, the point is to win!  But, going for the Checkmate (Fame score) is best focused on the Chess Endgame, where there is enough Advantge to win - going for it, not in the Chess Opening (Neolithic Age) where such a consideration wouldnt be so great, unless the opponent did nothing advantageous to counter it.  I just like the idea of comparing advantages to be gained, where at some point it tips in favor of doing it, then if still not done, it becomes extremely obvious in hindsight when it should have been done.  What choice is to be made if the other choice isn't seriously considered, staying Neolithic?  Hypothetically, if it took 1 turn to gain a each inner Star, on average, then there's a range of opportunites to consider leaping into the next age from turn 7 to turn 21.  Should it always be best to do it ASAP?  What if the answer was it depends based on the consideration of cultures to choose from vs specific veterancy?  That would be very much more interesting, imo.

Glad I was able to prompt such discussion, honestly I put this idea here because I wish it was in endless legend, where I feel like every region around my start is more interesting than my start itself. Hopefully whether the devs like the idea or not we continue to have great conversations about what makes a good game, and what players actually like. I love how responsive amplitude is and that you all listen to this feedback, have a great day.