Nah, Prussia and the later German Empire were extremely militaristic. The critique you levy against this "stereotype" could be applied to any culture type categorization in this game.

I think the military industrial focus is fine.  The air/navy bonus is definitely off.

"War is a biological necessity of the first importance, a regulative element in the life of mankind which cannot be dispensed with, since without it an unhealthy development will follow, which excludes every advancement of the race, and therefore all real civilization."

- Friedrich von Bernhardi, Germany and the Next War

Sums up the attitude of most Germans of that time period.

While I agree on the Prussian military aspects I would also refer to this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_technology_in_Germany

"Germany has been the home of some of the most prominent researchers in various scientific disciplines, notably physics, mathematics, chemistry and engineering.[1] Before World War II, Germany had generated more Nobel laureates in scientific fields than any other nation, and was the preeminent country in the natural sciences."

A science bonus, instead of air/sea bonus would definitely be fitting.

Hi.

You are right and wrong at the same time. Your criticism can be applied to many other civilizations.

The British were also a great scientific and cultural power. A great industrial power, it was even the first industrial power in history.

In reality, the path to power requires passing through all the factors of power, at the same time: military, scientific, industrial etc.

Having said that, it is true that Prussia and then Germany shone by their military power and their militarism. Germany was the power that developed the most submarine weapons during the Second World War. So the aspect "naval power" can, in this sense, correspond.

The United States is not an expansionist power. It is a country with a huge territory, and many other problems to deal with. But still, in Humankind the USA has the expansionist trait. This is not a big deal.

Focusing on a single aspect of a civilization could be a big problem for immersive experience. All major empires/civilizations were great by many aspects. To reach their max size, they were all expansionist at a point.

I am very disappointed by Rome. Rome was militarist, expansionist and builder. Their legacy is huge: roads, aqueducts, baths, arenas, civil code.

France was expansionist (Napoleon), scientist (The Encyclopedia), aesthete (Richelieu, Mazarin), builder (Eiffel), agrarian (most populated european country during centuries).

Even Venice. Commercial? Or aesthete as their diplomacy was incredibly strong? Or builder as the Arsenal was the biggest manufacture of the time that was able to pump out galleas at a crazy rate to help them dominate the sea?

USA: expansionist during first century, they have dominated the last century in all aspects (military, commerce, production, culture), so which one to pick?

Einstein was German.

A good solution would be to create several cultures per civilization and let the player (or random) choose which one to include into the game.

Hey,

i agree with what has been said before, concerning the - inevitable - reduction and simplification that goes for every Civilization in this game. Germans are just reduced to one aspect - like every other civilization in the game.

So here it is the militaristic one, which is fine with me - beeing German myself - , especially given the fact that we have done everything to earn it. Honestly, if you start two world wars (ok, with the first one beeing at least technically debatable) and exterminate an entire people you will not necessarily be remembered for your advances in science, litterature or the construction of beautiful, luxurious and completely co2-neutral (cough... cough) supercars in the first place. Had they made the special building the "Arbeitslager" and the special unit the Tiger tank, then ok... but as it is right now, it's fine with me.

Kamino72 wrote:

A good solution would be to create several cultures per civilization and let the player (or random) choose which one to include into the game.

I really like that. CIV did something similar, they had "copies" of the civilizations with different leaders. Humankind could offer the same culture in different flavors.

So you could truly make your own story and play as if things had happened differently. After all, HK promotes "what is your story?" at every corner.

And creating those flavors shouldn't be as costly as full new cultures. It would be a very efficient way to add replayability.

In Humankind, "Prussia" is Germans or Poles ? This is not obvious to me

Gwanelle wrote:

In Humankind, "Prussia" is Germans or Poles ? This is not obvious to me

There really is no Prussia, not at all. Germany is clearly a depiction of unified Germany (which was founded under Prussian lead though) - neither the coking works nor the uboat has any relation with Prussia. Poles is also quite distinctively a polish culture with their unit and quarter. 

As to the topic of the thread, I think Germany is depicted fine as industrial militarist with a focus on industry. I don't think it is wise to have two Germanys in industrial, that sounds like a waste of a precious slot to me in an era in which there are easily 30 good choices. If they want to add Prussia (Militarist again?), Bavaria (also Militarist?) or Saxony (Aesthete? Focus on Reformation) in Early Modern, that's fine for me on the other hand. And a medieval Hanse (merchant, focus on naval trade) would be a good 'german' addition that would not be military focused. Also, I don't think the Teutons as currently in the game are so much about warring.

I wouldn't advise adding more 'proto-germany' cultures to the game as it is now. Mods are fair enough, but this part of the world is quite well represented at the moment, while southeast asia (a part of the world in conflict for much of its history, including modern day) never has more than one culture within the region, and has non in the contemporary era.