One thing that I am hopeful for, tho have no evidence that this will happen, is a further evolution of the alliance system. There are two dimensions that I would like to see this changed: 1. The fact that in a normal game with 7 AI opponents, I can have 5 alliances going -- and in a large game with 16 AI opponents, I can only have 5 alliances going (and in smaller map games, could be potentially allied with everyone). I think the number of concurrent alliances should be scaled to the number of AIs in the original launch of the game. And you should not be able to form alliances with more than 25% of the original number of Civs in the game. So, if you have 8 that started the game, you can form 2. 2. To point 1, the way that the governors have been implemented, in spite of it's faults, may hold the key of scaling the right way. I like the idea of alliances going deeper with some customization. For example, I think military alliances should require the allied parties to have to join a war if the other is involved (or had declared war on), economic alliances should always require a "fair exchange" of goods and strategic resources (oil, iron, etc.), religious alliances on not only not exerting pressure on each other, but targeting pressure on others, etc. Right now, I just get alliances for the heck of it, and then switch them around depending on trade routes, but with no real strategic purpose. If I know that a military alliance with Mongolia means I am going to get into a lot of wars, I might think about is that the right alliance with him. I don't recall seeing anything specific around the alliance system being upgraded in GS, but hoping that they can take this a bit more to the next level. Or at least be able to implement some version of #1 and make forming alliances very strategic.