Yeah. Lots of changes. They reduced the number of ages down to three, Antiquity, Exploration, & Modern. In each age, you play a different civ. For example, you could start Antiquity with the Romans, transition into Spain for Exploration, and finish as Mexico in Modern.
Leaders and Civs are detached, so now you can play as Benjamin Franklin of Egypt or Napoleon of Japan. Leaders stay with you the whole campaign.
Settlers create Towns now instead of Cities. Towns are like puppet cities from Civ 5 in that they act autonomously. They mainly serve to harvest and send resources to your Cities. If they grow enough in population, you can spend money to convert them into Cities. District system has been reworked. Now there’s only two types of districts, Urban and Rural. Rural districts take the place of resource improvements, since there are no more builders. Urban districts get two building slots, and from what I’ve seen some buildings do get adjacency bonuses.
There’s a new unit called Commander that lets you stack your other army units on top of it and transport them across the map. Still have to unstack your army to engage in war.

There’s more changes, but these are main ones that jumped to mind in terms of dramatically changing the feel of the game.

Alright. Hopefully your memory comes back eventually. The idea of anger not being a primary emotion is an interesting thought I hadn’t considered before.

I’m afraid the article you linked also says anger can be a primary emotion or a secondary emotion.

Is anger always a secondary emotion?
It makes sense to feel angry as a response to injustices, perceived threats, or frustrations, and anger might truly be your primary emotion in the moment. It isn’t always masking another, more vulnerable emotion. For example, if an acquaintance made an inappropriate, derogatory comment about you in front of others, you might immediately be angry that someone unjustly crossed a boundary. In this case, anger is still functioning to alert you to something getting in the way of your goal (e.g., of respect), plus it’s an immediate, instinctual response to the situation.

Tbh I’m not a big fan of the article. It does not match up very well with my understanding of the emotions.
For example, Anger is a problem-solving emotion. Fear is the defensive emotion. Yet the article seems to mix up the two.

How do people willingly confront their most traumatic experience again and again?