It's fine, not great. The game is essentially just the classical era of a civ 4 game with the event system of CK2 (at launch) with very few lessons learned from either game. Your turn consists of issuing some number of Orders, usually less than you'd like. You have to split this between your units on the map (civilian + military) and the character interaction stuff. Building out the cities and managing the internal family politics is reasonablly entertaining, The resource management and tribal diplomacy is simple but tied into the character events in entertaining ways. Foreign rulers all kinda blur together - you can make friends with other leaders, but alliances rarely outlive either ruler, and because of how random it is there's often a big age gap. Where the game misses is it didn't learn the lesson Paradox did from CK2 to CK3 - for the character events to be impactful, there has to be a cost to your characters (their solution was the stress system). Instead, you just pick the optimal option for your current situation and all of your rulers kinda blur together. War is also miserable. Unit movements are so high and maps so large than enemies can swoop in from out of view and surround and nuke any individual unit. There's nowhere near enough tactical depth to justify the time spent babysitting units. It's a huge step back from a game like Humankind (specifically the game's battle system and its use of land). Ultimately the game does a few things reasonably well but doesn't really offer anything new and most of the things in this game are done better in others.
