I'll share some ideas I've had:
1. Remove the Palace as a capital. The capital will be an invisible building whose function is to grant the city the title of capital, but now the palace will be free to be used in many different ways. For example, loyalty could be changed depending on the type of government or whether there are governors. It could also be used to change the upkeep costs of some cities that are not from the same culture (similar to the corruption in Civilization 1), and would open up new strategies and leader abilities related to palace construction.
2. Make resources more unique in terms of bonuses, but also allow them to spread. As an example, I'll use Rice. Civilizations that had it developed hydraulic systems to meet their water demands, so a rice farm would provide (in addition to the farm's base food) +1 Science and cost 1 Gold to maintain. Wheat, on the other hand, was durable and could be stored for the future, so it would give a +2 Gold bonus. Horses, on the other hand, would reduce the base food of the space by 1, and after upgrading, would grant (in addition to the base production of the pasture) +1 to Horses, +1 to Culture, and 1 Gold maintenance cost. Since now, if a player has a resource, they can use gold to place it on another space, the bonus to luxury services that can be propagated would be reduced, and in the case of horses, the number of horses needed for troops would also be increased (Knights needed strong, quality horses). The number of resources appearing on the map would have to be reduced to limit them to small territories, maintain monopolies, and encourage wars to obtain a copy of the resources by looting them or simply eliminate those controlled by an opponent.
3. I think governments should be more flexible, which is why I think each government should be a small bonus and primarily define how the empire is held together or what defines civilization. For example, with a theocracy, the cornerstone of civilization would be religion, but it could be customized with a government policy that defines how power is concentrated (autocratic, oligarchic, or communal). This would add a limit to the player's power (in an autocracy, it's high, and governors cause problems; in an oligarchy, it would be shared with the governors, who would keep their bonuses; in a democracy, their bonuses would be reduced, as would the player's decision-making capacity, although they still compensate for it with other things), and also how economic and social matters are governed.
4. Governors should have more variation in their power depending on the type of government.
5. Elephants for everyone. If they are strategic, it would be enough to make them a little more expensive for other players, and have India and the others keep them cheaper and appear alongside them.
1. Remove the Palace as a capital. The capital will be an invisible building whose function is to grant the city the title of capital, but now the palace will be free to be used in many different ways. For example, loyalty could be changed depending on the type of government or whether there are governors. It could also be used to change the upkeep costs of some cities that are not from the same culture (similar to the corruption in Civilization 1), and would open up new strategies and leader abilities related to palace construction.
2. Make resources more unique in terms of bonuses, but also allow them to spread. As an example, I'll use Rice. Civilizations that had it developed hydraulic systems to meet their water demands, so a rice farm would provide (in addition to the farm's base food) +1 Science and cost 1 Gold to maintain. Wheat, on the other hand, was durable and could be stored for the future, so it would give a +2 Gold bonus. Horses, on the other hand, would reduce the base food of the space by 1, and after upgrading, would grant (in addition to the base production of the pasture) +1 to Horses, +1 to Culture, and 1 Gold maintenance cost. Since now, if a player has a resource, they can use gold to place it on another space, the bonus to luxury services that can be propagated would be reduced, and in the case of horses, the number of horses needed for troops would also be increased (Knights needed strong, quality horses). The number of resources appearing on the map would have to be reduced to limit them to small territories, maintain monopolies, and encourage wars to obtain a copy of the resources by looting them or simply eliminate those controlled by an opponent.
3. I think governments should be more flexible, which is why I think each government should be a small bonus and primarily define how the empire is held together or what defines civilization. For example, with a theocracy, the cornerstone of civilization would be religion, but it could be customized with a government policy that defines how power is concentrated (autocratic, oligarchic, or communal). This would add a limit to the player's power (in an autocracy, it's high, and governors cause problems; in an oligarchy, it would be shared with the governors, who would keep their bonuses; in a democracy, their bonuses would be reduced, as would the player's decision-making capacity, although they still compensate for it with other things), and also how economic and social matters are governed.
4. Governors should have more variation in their power depending on the type of government.
5. Elephants for everyone. If they are strategic, it would be enough to make them a little more expensive for other players, and have India and the others keep them cheaper and appear alongside them.
