Why? Please explain. I really do not think we have too many Game Options. Actually there is not one single Game Option that I feel we have to remove. I always thought we want to give players more options. Are Game Options a problem for AI in your opinion? ------- Agreed, there are several Game Options I personally never ever use. But maybe other players do. Those Game Options I use a lot - they are "my personal deaulfts": (But others may not want to turn them on - so it is fine to have the option.) No Settlement Razing Permanent Alliances New Random Seed on Reload Show Hidden Variables Only 1 Colonist per Native Village Those Game Options I feel are valid, even though I hardly use them: (In 1 out of 10 games I activate them.) Reduced Royal Expeditionary Force Random Settlement Area of Natives Those Game Options I never use, but they were explicitly requested by a few people from community: (Basically options to deactivate old TAC / RaR features I really like and always play with.) No Wild Animals on Land No Wild Animals in Water Use old Founding Father System Those Game Options I also never use because I really like Ancient Ruins and Events. (They are by the way also Vanilla. But maybe purists may like to use them from time to time.) No Ancient Ruins No Events The Game Options I really feel that they are absolutely pointless: (But actually all of them are Vanilla Game Options.) Unrestricted Leaders Always Peace Always Wars 1 City Challenge Lock Modified Assets (maybe needed for MP games?) ------- Summary: I really do not feel that we ever added a Game Option without reason. Thus I also do not think we should remove any of them. All the really pointless Game Options are from Vanilla. But I also do not think we should remove them.