You’re spaced out.

Yes, giving aggressors a reward for their behavior is a historically tried and tested strategy and will make the world a more peaceful place. /s

That’s why they meet there!

Plus the wife is a sober alcoholic (according to her own videos, she did drink a real beer since her husband joined the military), the while situation won’t make it easy for her to stay sober. Poor kids.

And I guess there aren’t that many countries that might be less suited to move to if you had alcohol problems in your past.

Just look at the military decisions Hitler made, that was luckily an incompetent guy thinking he’s smarter than everyone else. That rings a bell, doesn’t it?

In the long run, making less stupid decisions wouldn’t most likely have changed the outcome, but even more people would likely have died (and unfortunately the people executing the murder of the Jews weren’t as incompetent as their glorious leader).

I played Humankind as well, but I like the execution in Civ better (despite the bugs and unfinished ui). Butt yes, the idea want original at all.

If you have never played Civ before it would be a good time to start with Civ 5 or maybe even Civ 3. They are cheap and quite polished.

In my opinion (having played Civ since the first game, yes I’m old), Civ 7 is quite ok in it’s foundations, but it’s clearly released too early and like the other parts before it’s mainly a game about optimizing numbers, not so much about strategy.

Biggest turn off for me is the introduction of “rogue like” mechanics that give you to play certain characters and nations in a certain way to access others. Why would I want to have that crap in a strategy game?

A phone reacting to “ok Google” or the equivalent for the other assistants already requires to listen to what you’re saying - doesn’t seem to affect battery life all that much.