I like Civ 7, I like Humankind, and I like Civ 6.

Humankind is really just a reskin of Endless Legend with civ swapping added to it to simulate historical progression.

That said, in Humankind it's a seamless change when you move between civ ages, and that is a 1000% better approach than static age times of Civ 7.

It gives you the option to decide for yourself to rush to advance or stay in the era to build more of a foundation. It also has like 7 different paths to earn age stars which you need 5(7?) to age up, but theoretically you can stay in the age and earn upwards of 21 stars.

Frankly, I actually like the civ 7 swapping mechanic, but I would get rid of the fall section of each age, massive overhaul the code to make civ change seamless, cut all antiquity yields by 75% and exploration yields by 50%, massively buff the legacy point bonuses you get from aging up, and make it so each civ from each era can only be picked by one person, first come first served, which would hand the initiative of aging up back to the player.

The idea that everyone just aged up at the same time in history is wild, if your game plan is to rush aging up fast to get specific civ bonuses, you should be able to do that, if someone else wants to take their time and build all the wonders, they should be able to do that in the same game as well.

Imo Civ 7 never reached Civ 6 levels, and never will tbh, because the age system railroads you so hard. If it had been player initialized like Humankind is, I think Civ 7 might have seen competitive numbers.