Humankind

Looks like a better Civ than Civ 6

>I thought it was pretty unique as far as sci-fi games go
it is, but it's also a grab bag of random bullshit that gets really tiresome after a while. I can understand wanting a break, I know I do

The elevation differentials make it look a lot nicer, but it also looks far goofier. This ain't Endless Legend where you can have gigantic pillars sticking out of the ground and have it look okay.

Attached: ss_30272ddb458c9b74ca5c211575924c1043834e4b.1920x1080[1].jpg (1920x1080, 875K)

Can I build a Cyberpunk city in the endgame yet?

Attached: 1528727959038.jpg (1920x1049, 905K)

seriously?

Attached: 1557446014064.jpg (588x385, 33K)

I think it's just the nature of 4x games now, especially ones based loosely on history, to have one foot in RetardEra and one foot in /int/

I came....

No thanks at least this game looks like it has a great way to coat the map in urban sprawl which civ is sorely lacking.

>hexagon grid
Laziest bullshit ever invented.

>60 different civilizations

That's a good number, should be enough to cover a fair amount of less known civilizations from outside of Europe, the Near East, and East Asia; like South/Southeast Asian ones, Mesoamerican ones, Andeans, etc.

>From Bronze age fo Modern times

This worries me though. Civ is bad enough in how it implies there's a singular linear path technology advances through and that all cultures will pas through them using tyhe same milestones, but at least it splits it up merely as ancient, classical, m,edivial, etc; which, while somewhat eurocenytric, is at least vague enough it can work.

But "bronze age", "iron age", etc are too s[pecific. So are Mesoamerican civilizations for example not gonna be in at all then solely because they never used bronze tools even though they BTFO'd bronze age civilizations in plenty of other regars?"

Civ VI lets you construct districts that turn your city into urban sprawl. I've had cities devolve into something like 20 districts

civ (and clones now, apparently) have lost track of what makes them interesting entirely and now seem to be designed around marketing memes for different leaders and cultures. I agree, I'd almost rather play a game that didn't have defined civs and ages at all, and instead used some combination of your choices and your surroundings to assess likely paths for you in the future, allowing you to pick the ideal one, and factoring that into future events.
>x civ gets bonuses to y if it builds in the desert, because it built in the desert IRL
fuck off with that, it isn't interesting at all. that shit should be determined by the civ's prehistory in-game, not transplanted from real life. and the same goes for tech advances.
but I guess that would take real experimental work and would challenge the going standard, which everyone knows sells well.

Won't it just work like civ where everyone can get to end level tech despite historical stuff. I'm more concerned witb how fleshed out civs are gonna be, if there's sixty of them there can't be that much differentiation.

Shut the fuck up you SJW twat. Technology does evolve on a linear pathway, Americans, Africans, and Australasians were just shit. You can get pretty far in Civ games without researching some of the techs, but obviously you're going to need to learn how to make gunpowder as a prerequisite to learn how to make rifles, or you're going to need to learn metallurgy to actually become a relevant civilization. There's only one American civilization that even managed to research animal husbandry, one of the first techs, and that was because of the Incans, and as such, no Native Americans ever developed the wheel, which only would become useful if you already figured out animal husbandry and had nice, flat terrain for roads, something the Incans did not have.

Attached: Cute bab Llama Dies Horrible Bloody Death.webm (638x476, 2.86M)

but if you're just going to recreate history, why have any civs other than central/western european ones? in fact why have civ at all?
he isn't being SJW, don't be a retard. he's just looking for something with more potential for player creativity and more options. which is what civ games should really excel at, and yet we get the exact opposite.

>technology evolves on a linear pathway
You fucking retard, holy shit.

This is why you'll never design a game. Your ideas are shit. The point of unique abilities that provide static bonuses are to make them unique in ways that actually matter. Early Civ games didn't have civilization bonuses and you don't see anyone going back to replay them over IV/V/VI.

Attached: civilization-VI-cleopatra[1].png (1440x900, 1.71M)

Civ 6's art will never not disgust me

This. I'm super hyped for this game. It looks like a better civ than civ.

Civ games are not about recreating history exactly. That's why you can play as the Incans and actually develop the wheel - you can have sheep/cows/etc start near you, allowing you to get the prerequisite boosts for wheel. It's a game about what-ifs, not 100% historical accuracy, because then everyone would just play America or China and you'd never see anyone play Zulu, Rome, or Aztecs.

>civ 6
>good

I want to kiss this llama's head and give it neck scratch and feed it and roll around in the grass with it
This llama is cute cute cute cute cute cute cute!!!
Thank you for posting this llama, user. Please rename the file.

t. shitskin or coastal elite (or both)

Domesticatable animals are a prerequisite to animal husbandry. Animal husbandry is a prerequisite to developing the wheel. Wheels are a prerequisite to developing mechanical power. Where is the flaw in the logic here? Of course civilizations that never had a fucking cow or horse for their entire existence aren't going to develop the wheel.

well duh, vanilla civ games are shit

that huge art gap between base vanilla vi and dlc

Epic rebuttal

omg black pepo

>please rename the file

Attached: 1419513306043.gif (340x305, 1.99M)

>real world le ancient civilizations shit and not fantasy

yikes gonna be a hard pass from me

Dude holy shit I don't even disagree with what I think you're trying to say. Which is certain techs require certain prerequisites but God damm theres so much other dumb shit in your post. First off they did invite the wheel it's on their toys the concept of it existed it's just that when you live in a jungle and mountain area it's kinda useless without say cows. Speaking of which neither the Africans or SAs had animals that were good for that shit. Even elephants which you can tame suck ass for it cause they take multiple generations of human for one generation of elephant. Vs something like pigs which can have several generations within a few years. Europeans were destined to do amazing they had a 10/10 spawn location.

where the FUCK is Endless RPG

:( ok

I just gotta vent
>You need to pick a new civ in each era, the game wants to have you mix matching civs, doing absolute meme bullshit like Sumeria > Macedonia > Khmer
>Civs that don't fit well in the classical bronze age > iron age > middle age stuff are dealt with a heavy hand
>Any dark age civ gets shafted, most of early Europe is a meme. Vikings are Iron Age along with civs that existed 1000 years before them.
>The biggest blunder is native americans, which are not playable. No Aztecs, Inca or Maya until the DLC. North/West Africa and like Ethiopia is represented, but the south isn't.
>Long lasting civs are also a big blunder. There is some squirming around with stuff like Saxons - Normandy - England - United Kingdom, but in general the solutions are bad since each civ shows up once.
>So for example, we have each Nordic country appearing in each era. You can't have Denmark vs Sweden vs Norway since you are supposed to pick one in each era.
>China is of course pandered to by having each dinasty be a civ. But fucking Japan cannot be played until the Industrial age.
>You people are going to have a field day with the modern age picks.

"they" is not one group. Aztecs developed a crude wheel that they used in their toys, but they never created carts because they had no pack animals with which to use them. Carts allow for the bulk movement of goods across large distances, allowing for more specialization as less people have to move the food they produce towards populated areas, and they can move more at once. This is why China and Rome got so huge - they could move massive amounts of grains from their fuck huge farms to their booming cities, from Palermo to Xi'an, from Londinium to Chang'an. Meanwhile, 9 out of the 10 most populated Aztec cities were around one lake, a lake which no longer exists, and the 10th was Cempoala, a coastal city with large fish stocks nearby.

And said lack of wheel and pack animals, and animal husbandry, is a huge reason the Mayan civilization collapsed twice.

normalfags don't know shit about history. They don't understand why the incas and aztecs didn't use wheels, why they didn't just create cows, sheep, chicken and pigs, or why they didn't just create massive farmlands in mountains and jungles.
Retards just see unga bunga and think ooga booga

But it has more character! See how she glances at your dick!

i need to see this in action
this sounds really fucking dumb

Attached: 1464065777050.png (843x490, 67K)

this is just proof that the british and french colonials had every right to slaughter the northern native savages. They had an 8/10 starting location and did fuckall with it.

Some technology evolves linearly but other types do not.

No, you're just too goddamned stupid and caught up in fucking moral and historical relativism that you don't see what I'm laying out. Certain technologies are going to REQUIRE previous technologies to complete. Native Americans never got past animal husbandry, outside of the Incans, because they didn't have any easily domesticatable animals, and the ones they did have weren't useful for power. Aside from mountains, no terrain makes wheel unusable. Bronze working is one of the earliest technologies that a culture can develop, and once you have that, you can easily clear cut forests and jungles. What the fuck do you think happened to the Middle East? There used to be lush jungle pretty much everywhere north of the Arabian Peninsula, which is why they experienced one of the earliest population booms. Also, India, which managed to develop despite being given one of the worst hands geographically.

Part of it is requiring certain conditions (strong, domesticatable pack animals), but others is just pure genetic or cultural superiority. Polynesians didn't have any animals either, and yet they managed to develop math and astronomy because they aren't genetically inferior like the Australian aboriginals or North Native Americans. The Iroquois were good at government and that was it. The Lakota, Sioux, Cheyenne, Cree, Cherokee, and so on couldn't even manage that.

Fuck the Mapuche

Attached: 1385353261105.png (680x572, 1.07M)

Did you not read or understand anything I said or are you just acting retarded on purpose? I don't disagree that those techs lead to specialization and that leads to even more techs. China and Europe(e.g Rome) had massive plains where you could farm that alone makes the idea of cars worth doing. You can't fucking farm in a jungle you moron the soil is awful and you cant farm in the mountains unless specific conditions are there. Carts would have nothing to carry on top which, like I already said, there were no animals for them to domesticate, not tame but domesticate. Please explain to me what you think they should have done in a land with no iron and no domesticalbe animals, with soil unfit for farming. Meanwhile in Africa you ever notice how theres no mountain ranges? You know what that does to the weather and or general climate you fucking twat? Makes it extremely unpredictable meaning farming is out. And without farms or large natural supplies of food you dont get cities or specialization. The Mayans/Aztecs/Incas did amazing with what they had.

America is one of the best starting locations in the world. Just the landmass that would become the United States had everything going for it, which is why even with next to no advancement out of the stone age, the continent held tens of millions of people. Imagine how many Americans would be alive today if they managed to domesticate the bison or not kill off their native species of camels and horses. There'd be more of them than Chinese and Indians combined

Where did I say that wasn't the case?
The native americans got fucked geographically and couldn't advance in many areas because of it. It's more than just mountains and jungles but listing all of them in a fucking Yea Forums post is retard when you can get the basic idea across with just a few, and listing any more than that will fry the brains of your average election tourist.

No. Civs are locked by era and you are supposed to change. You can only play Egypt in Bronze Age, you can only play Rome in Iron Age, so on. No machine gun legionaries today.

>see civ thread
>click it
>it's /intpolhis/ shitflinging

I don't know why I bother

I'm this guy
If all you're saying is that you need A to get to B then yes 100%. What I'm saying is they didn't even have a chance at A. And despite that they still did amazing. I disagree 100% on any terrain being good for roads and carts though. The marshes jungles and mountains make carving out roads almost impossible. They still struggle to do it today.

>You will never see what a Japan style westernized Mesoamerica and Andean civilization would look like
>All you have is discount store Spain which isn't even a country interesting enough to fill a peninsula, imagine two and a half continents
This is truly a cursed timeline

lmao is there a fucking manual to make westerns games? "it got have 2 blacks, 2 gays, 1 interracial couple, 1 strong woman who hates man, 1 shaved hair woman, one black cientist and so on so on".

Please be a fake leak

I don't think you understand what I said. Native Americans by and large never discovered the wheel. Fact. Aztecs be damned.
>You can't fucking farm in a jungle moron
Tell that to India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Thailand, and so on. You don't need traditional wheat farms, you can do rice farms with their abundant water, you can make plantations to grow things like breadfruit or bananas. Large scale wheat farming is only seen in European cultures because of the over-abundance of flat, fertile land next to easy water sources that don't regularly flood, and because of it being a cultural holdover from the greater Mediterranean/Middle Eastern Bronze Age area.

>you can't farm in the mountains
No one said they had to
>Carts would have nothing to carry on top
There was plenty
>land with no iron
There is plenty of iron in the new world, and, failing that, they have bronze.
>Soil unfit for farming
Patently false. The American continent is one of the most fertile in all of the world.

>Meanwhile in Africa you ever notice how theres no mountain ranges?
Of course
>You know what that does to the weather and or general climate?
Lead to some of the most fertile and productive land? You do understand that Rhodesia alone was able to feed the entire British empire, right? And no, African climate and weather are not unpredictable. In fact, in East Africa, it was so predictable that it made several Muslims, Romans, and Indians extremely rich.

>Picture shows a bunch of people from all over the world
>Impressed there is a black person in there

And yet everyone who isn't genetically inferior made it work. You're acting as if South East Asia isn't simultaneously the prime example of the type of terrain you're saying is bad and also one of the most densely populated regions on the planet. There are more SEAsians on this planet than people in USA, Canada, and Mexico COMBINED.

you know thats intended, right, user?
Do you really think thats just a coincidence?

Yes, it is intended, as in, they intended to put a variety of people in there, the whole thing is like 48% white 50% asian and there is one black guy. One. On a group picture showing people from all over the old world. It is nothing to shitpost about, you have just been pavloved into dementia.

>blackonblondes
Of course.

yeah why didn't they just use llamas as pack animals lol never mind that they're one of the most unruly domesticated 'pack' animals to exist that even today people struggle with.

I have work in the morning but I'll give you one more (you). I really really want know how you think that bananas are crop you can build a civilization on as compared to wheat which is cheap to produce labor wise. Keep in mind that bananas back then were these tiny fruits. They didnt have wheat which is what made Europe and Northern Africa so great or rice grains like the Asian cultures and even they somehow got the seeds you know the climate can't sustain them right?
Jungle soil is very very thin soil it's awful for farming the jungles you mentioned aren't actually jungle nations they had plains as well. For the weather in Africa again it is unpredictable for farming where you need consistent rain every year wtf. Maybe I should be more specific to the southern half of Africa.
Dude today as in right now yes scientifically there are genetic differences these however came after. You're putting the horse before the cart. Their surroundings effected the genetic lineage. South East asians did not even match the Aztec or Incan architecture or expansion look at the Philippines they're still shit they're largely on top now cause of the Europeans using the islands as ports. Also having population numbers as a measurement of success is fucking stupid.

You're absolutely fucking retarded if you truly think what you believe. Especially that last part about the architecture. Angkor Wat is more impressive than Tenochtitlan, let alone everything else produced by the SEAsian cultures.

Attached: angkor-wat.jpg[1].jpg (1600x900, 412K)

I got no problem with 1. You treat the civs as comparable civs in your unique games' world. Macedonia is used as a placeholder for whatever unique name and appearance but similar theme (equestrian half-civilized highlanders and lowlander feudal magnates) exists in your world.
"Heavy Hand" begs defining. Are they nerfed ingame, or is this just autism about Maya being classified as Ancient or Classical instead of medieval?
Vikings co-existed with the United States of America in Civ. This is not a problem.
Absence of Native Americans is pretty terrible. I don't mind South Africa not being represented, Zulu is horribly overexaggerated.
Again, I see the civs as themes. The theme of the Saxons is different from the theme of the UK.
I don't see the problem here because the game is trying to let you sandbox civilizations, having a very strict very defined Norway or Denmark defeats the purpose.
It'd be nice to have Japan more than just the Industrial Age but it didn't experience the China
If it was a legit leak it'd tell us the modern nations, not be the usual coy larping "teeheee just wait till you see this guys ;-)"

Above all the problem seems to be expecting the civilization "you play as a very specific nation" model. By the design of the 10 civs each 6 ages model it's aiming to let you blend and blur your faction into a unique civilization, not just "You are Denmark from the start to the end of the game." It'd jack up replayability to be able to pick and choose, blend and blur. And it reflects the idea of a civilization changing over time instead of Byzantium being religiously adept from 2680BC to 1999 AD. You could go from an expansionist barbaric state (Gaul) to religious-spreading hegemons (Franks) to the epitome of high culture and artistry (Louis the Sun King France) to expanionist imperialists (Napoopan).

Or you can be France and have from start to finish a culture bonus and a unique building and that's it.

Both the Mayans and the Inca had plenty of domesticated crops, are you forgetting fucking corn exists? It's the very reason why they got the population to built their shit in the first place.

You are being a moron.

No shit, you need some pre-requisite technologies and ideas to do later things, like as you note, there's no way you are going to develop, say, rifles or firearms without metal, but that's different from asserting that there's a singular progression path or that ALL socities MUST develop along the exact same pathway as Eurasian socities did period.

For example, your animal husbandry comment. Putting aside the fact that your point is fucking wrong, since the Mesoamericans had domesticated poultry, dogs, and bees; your assertion that it's "one of the first techs" is exactly the sort of retarded horseshit i'm pointing out. There's nothing inherent to animal domestication which fundamentally makes it a foundational element of complex civilization that subsequent developments Eurasian socities made using it can ONLY be made using it.

Case in point, the Mesoamericans, while having some unique quirks and limitations as a result of not having effective draft animals (seasonal warfare, lack of traditional sieges, hedgemonic and indirect political systems rather then imperial ones, etc); it didn't stop them from achieving a level of complexity comparable to Bronze age civilizations in most ways, and eclipising Bronze age civilizations in quite a few. As this image points out, the bigger Mesoamerican cities even 1000+ years before the Spanish showed up were bigger then the largest Iron Age cities. There's even some ways they matched or exceeed Classical and Medivial Societies. Your assertion that they somehow "failed" is fucking laughable, considering they were on par with where Eurasia was in most ways, after an equailvent amount of time after having first formed civilizations; and actually being ahead in a decent amount of them.

Attached: 1523739437357.jpg (1585x4078, 1.88M)

cont:

THIS is what I mean by "there's no linear development". I'm not saying there's no such thing as pre-requisite developments, I'm saying that the specific pathways and when specific technologies or societial development European and Near Eastern socities had in that specific order is not nessscarily the only way to progress. The Mesoamericans and Andean both show this, and were wildly successful despite having beasts of burden.

Secondly, you seem totally fucking ignorant towards the fact that there's more Mesoamerican and Andean civilizations beyond just the Aztec and Inca, suich as your assertion that the Inca domesdticated llamas, or that Cempoala was an "Aztec" city; when Llamas were domesticated buy earlier andean civilizations and the city of Cempoala belonged to the Totonac, not Aztec/Nahua civiilization, and it was fucking far from the 10th largest Mesoamerican city. There's fucking dozens of major civilizations in both regions beyond the Aztec and Inca: The Maya, of course, but also the Zapotec, Moche, Classic Veracruz, Wari, Teotihuacan (which was a bigger city then fucking rome, with a much higher standard of lkiving as well with all it's citizens in fancy mulitroom complexes; though not as densely populated as a result), Tiwanku, Mixtec, Sican, Toltec, Chimu, Purepecha, etc: All of these had cities and formal state goverments, and there's 3x as many I could list. The first fucking Mesoamerican socitiety with monumental archtecture, class systems, etc are 2500+ YEARS OLDER then the Aztec. See pic.

Aztec/Nahua cities were mostly located around a large lake basin yes, since that area was hyper-fertile and was previously home to other successful Mesoamericna civilizations like Teotihuacan, but your implication that that's the only place in Precolumbian mexico with complex socities is fucking absurd.

Attached: 1566206923796.png (1457x1790, 997K)

You describe a good system. I think the best civ game would have you picking archetypes for each era and then the aesthetic flavor of your civ.
And yeah, by following civ's model you can get like three civs out of England.

No, absolutely not. Animal Husbandry IS a really early tech. It's a prerequisite for so many things. In Civilization, you can get all the way to Engineering and Ship Building without researching it, which the Native Americans/Polynesians certainly did, but without animal power and wheels, they're not getting anywhere past that. And that's how real life played out, too. Aztecs never discovered any Medieval technology, aside from Education, and all because they never had domesticated animals.

Wow what a rebuttal. At least look up Tenochtitlan or Machu Pichu they didnt just build giant temples they manage to build cities. Maybe I went to far in saying they didnt match it but God damn did they build some amazing things.
This is at least an attempt. user corn is way way harder to grow on mass then wheat or rice. From that I'm guessing you can guess why it's not as useful? Cause it takes up more space to grow per calorie and when harvested isnt as easy to store cobs take up more space. Theres a lot of advantages to wheat and rice user.

Attached: mayapan-mayan-ruins.jpg (550x412, 59K)

cont:

There were city-states, kingdoms, and empires across the entire region: The Mixtec and Zapotec were two major civilizations in the valleys of Oaxaca and Guerror, the Olmec, Totonac, Huastec, Classic Veracruz, etc were in the lowlands around the gulf, you has various kingdoms and states in the arid hills of west mexico, and obviously the Maya in the jungles of the Yucatan. And on that note, the Maya DID successful clear and farm en mass in the jungles, a fucking huge amount of what's now jungle in the Yucatan used to be sprawls of developed, landscaped suburbs: Tikal's suburbs were so fucking huge it connected multiple cities, cxovered hundreds of square miles, and housed millions of people, see pic.

I'm just totally baffled by your posts in general. In some respects you seem veyr knowledgable, in others you seem to be saying the most blatently moronic shit possible.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you aren't as stupoid as your posts implyt and you are decently informed on some of this shit, but the format of Yea Forums is leading to you being most hostile and inflammatory then neeeded and it's causing you to say the satupifd shit as shitposting. So if you actually have an intrest in engaging in a conversation about this in good faith without the BS, email me at [email protected] ; woul;d love to talk about it in more detail without the shitflinging

I'm going to bed

Attached: 1563463800845.jpg (2936x2064, 3.31M)

Theoretically you don't need animals for any of that. Animals aren't the only fuel for a wheeled vehicle. Animals are just a crutch for civilizations that like to play on easy mode.
>tfw my ancestors were too pussy to discover steam and coal powered rail lines before riding horses

I don't care. All these stupid fucking historical strategy games never have any South Slav nation you can play as. Not a single one. (except Paradox games) So I'm not going to play it. Fuck the Egyptians. Fuck the Romans. Fuck the Greeks.

There's no such thing as inherently "ancient", "classical", or "medivial technology" you moron, that's the point. Socities developed it at different points.

The Mesoamericans never invented sails yet the Aztec had the first public education systems, empirical medicine, proto-taxonomy; and the Maya invented true suenspsion bridges, etc.

The only reason you label specific techs as X or Y is because that's the period Eurasians happened to develop them, when clearly, as the mesoamericans and Andeans demonstrated; you CAN develop them "earlier" or later and still be successful regardless.

Correct, you don't.

The Mesoameircans and ANdeand developed nearly all the shit bronze and iron age civilizations did without beasts of burden, and developed a few things even classical and medivial civilizations didn't.

Trying to box them into a specific Eurasian time period based on an arbitrary single technology they did or didn';t have, be that metallurgy or animal husbandry, is fucking stupid because they AREN'T Eurasian, weren't on the same path, etc

Maybe you should have done something historically relevant you fucking slav

Oh boy, another identical game in a different setting. Fun.

This is all crap.
Its all gonna be based on triggers with little emergent gameplay.
I want a DF equivalent civ like game but with tons of simulated systems instead of it being a fucking board game.

first Bulgarian empire > any shitty R*man/Gr**k empire

They just aren't really interesting. What would a Serbian special ability even be? Whining all day on Yea Forums?

Actually, maybe Bulgaria is fun, but they are in Age of Empires II

bwaahhhh it's too cartoony and there's brown ppl

Literally all the land of that empire once belonged to the Romans.

>You don't build the great wall of china or the collosus
>You build a great wall, great statue, great masoleum and they adapt to your graphical style

And it got surpassed by based South Slavs. The Romans got shit on.

Lets think of all the fine things the Bulgarians contributed to culture, history and science.
Oh wait, pffftphahahaha.

More like:
>your technological advancments and improvments depends on the specific geographic and climate conditions of your area and neighboring clans/empires.
Mythologies form and progress in a similar fashion to earth with polytheism under certain conditions getting a strong push towards becoming monotheism roughly around the period in which it actually happened in human history.
History is followed in terms of general trends but all the details are contingent on the generated map and the plethora of different geographical climate and cultural/social idea conditons of your people.

Nikola Tesla is worth more than all the Romans combined.

this but unironically!

Ankor Wat is just one part of an even larger city complex
I've been to Cambodia and the entire region there is just a massive city complex covered with temples and other buildings.
even the old reservoirs from 1000 years ago still help the current population of the area with their irrigation

Cool game

Same shit with the mays, the pyramids you see are just single structures of wjat were large urban cores, and then huge sprawls of suburbs with sheets of hones, agricultral lan, smaller cores, and interconnected aquaduct, agricultral canal, resvoir, and drainage systems, see

Can you go back to chinese internet please?

Secret sodomite clubs

dss

*maya

The Aztec, Inca, and Maya are a meme anyways,

Not that those are memes, but those 3 being the only ones is a meme. there's tons of other civilizations around them nobody ever talks about