I'm actually a big Civ fan, so I'm always eager to try different takes on the formula. When Humankind first launched, I was not a fan. But since it was included in this month's Humble Choice bundle with all the DLC, I thought I'd give it another shot. And I still don't like it, unfortunately.
It does a few things better than Civ, the main one being its events system, a mechanic that Civ desperately needs to add some needed flavor to playthroughs. However, everything else just feels like it's trying to capture what Civ does, but half-stepping their way towards that. Combat is needlessly complex. Diplomacy is utterly broken. Your units will get attacked at random by other Civs despite not being at war and you can't quite understand why. The mechanic for settling cities is a needless downgrade from Civ, adding extra steps to what should be a simple mechanic. Humankind also has the Civ VI issue of everything feeling like it takes forever to build due to ridiculous Production costs. At least in Humankind you can build multiple of the same District, and I like that Districts lower Loyalty/Stability instead of requiring Population.... but it just doesn't work right.
And good God, why can't I customize what tiles I work in my cities? Why can't I build roads? Why are so many things automated (like trade routes)? Why can't I buy tiles? Why is there a cap on how many cities I can found? You copied the District system from Civ VI, good for you, but the District system was put in Civ to make players play a wider playstyle instead of Civ V's meta of a few big cities. You're supposed to settle a lot of cities with the District system so you can specialize more cities and plant more Districts. Putting a cap on cities in Humankind just boggles my mind!
I think my biggest issue with Humankind is that it lacks identity. When I play Civ, I want to play as Rome, or America, or Babylon, or etc. I don't want to play a custom Civ against 5 other custom Civs. Humankind's Civs aren't Civs, they're just amalgamations of what bonuses you want to pick. That makes the gameplay feel samey. In Civ, the Civ you choose has unique abilities that you build around and take advantage of through the course of the game. That gives each Civ flavor and identity, it makes the game replayable. Humankind does not do that. It makes everyone feel generic, and all of a sudden it's just about what build you feel like making, and then beelining all of the cultures per era that fit your said build.
And that's a big problem, because it makes it so Humankind doesn't have a personality at all. It feels very generic, bland, and utterly boring.
Score: 70
It does a few things better than Civ, the main one being its events system, a mechanic that Civ desperately needs to add some needed flavor to playthroughs. However, everything else just feels like it's trying to capture what Civ does, but half-stepping their way towards that. Combat is needlessly complex. Diplomacy is utterly broken. Your units will get attacked at random by other Civs despite not being at war and you can't quite understand why. The mechanic for settling cities is a needless downgrade from Civ, adding extra steps to what should be a simple mechanic. Humankind also has the Civ VI issue of everything feeling like it takes forever to build due to ridiculous Production costs. At least in Humankind you can build multiple of the same District, and I like that Districts lower Loyalty/Stability instead of requiring Population.... but it just doesn't work right.
And good God, why can't I customize what tiles I work in my cities? Why can't I build roads? Why are so many things automated (like trade routes)? Why can't I buy tiles? Why is there a cap on how many cities I can found? You copied the District system from Civ VI, good for you, but the District system was put in Civ to make players play a wider playstyle instead of Civ V's meta of a few big cities. You're supposed to settle a lot of cities with the District system so you can specialize more cities and plant more Districts. Putting a cap on cities in Humankind just boggles my mind!
I think my biggest issue with Humankind is that it lacks identity. When I play Civ, I want to play as Rome, or America, or Babylon, or etc. I don't want to play a custom Civ against 5 other custom Civs. Humankind's Civs aren't Civs, they're just amalgamations of what bonuses you want to pick. That makes the gameplay feel samey. In Civ, the Civ you choose has unique abilities that you build around and take advantage of through the course of the game. That gives each Civ flavor and identity, it makes the game replayable. Humankind does not do that. It makes everyone feel generic, and all of a sudden it's just about what build you feel like making, and then beelining all of the cultures per era that fit your said build.
And that's a big problem, because it makes it so Humankind doesn't have a personality at all. It feels very generic, bland, and utterly boring.
Score: 70