Thanks for the feedback, Aussie. Re: Victories, I definitely think that the multiple victories scheme can lay the foundation for several smaller victories, rather than a whole lot of winner-take-all victories. I've already suggested ways to divide up the culture and conquest victories into smaller chunks, so dividing up diplomacy and the space race is a good idea too. The key is that a game about history will always be unrealistic as long as it's 'winner take all'. Imagine every nation in the world today were conducting its diplomacy around "Winner Take All". Moving away from that is key. Re: Economics, I definitely agree that the economic system needs a new look. But I chose to model the economic system closer to expansion-and-conquest than it is to building-and-trading. The latter is certainly closer to what we think of as the basis for Civilization's economy. But expansion-and-conquest is much more robust and fun, IMO. (Still, there's no reason there couldn't be a hybrid. I do think that there needs to be an economic space that's fundamentally competitive, however.) One last note. Culture. There are two main reasons we didn't talk about the culture spreading model here. The first is that there are already a few attempts to implement it, and I give that the thumbs up. The second is that the culture-spreading system is really a means to an end, rather than an end in itself. It changes the way culture behaves -- but since culture doesn't do much, spreading culture has no significant impact on gameplay (besides funky border behavior). We tried to focus on features that could work well in isolation. "Great Culture Trends" seemed to work better in isolation than "Culture Spreading", but you can imagine that the combination of the two could have really big possibilities.