What do you all think about removing government colony limits?

TLDR: Do you think colony limits should be removed?



This is partly feedback to the devs, partly a rant, partly a review, and partly asking other players opinion.



And, honestly, this is also partly one of those "do what suits you" things but I was curious to know others' opinions. Basically, I was thinking about removing the colony limits on governments in my game and was wondering if others have thought of or have done the same.





----------------------------





I like the governments concept but i feel like there's no real cohesion between the way they function and their colony limits. There also seems to be no real path for upgrades between similiar governments.



Lets use cultural as our example. Media assimilation gives +10 to influence and that's all it does. That is a really powerful bonus, especially early on when your planets are normally getting 2 culture per turn. That's a 500% increase. But it has a planet cap of 12. This government is great for converting your neighbors worlds but once you've taken 1 or 2, you're at or over your planet limit.



The obvious thing to do then is to grab it's upgraded version Galactic communion. This still adds 10 influence and has a colony limit of 48, meaning you can culturally convert a great many planets. It also gives 30% more food, 1 moral, 30% ship range, and has a unique ship. A clear upgrade for media assimilation.



Except, this upgrade is in the age of ascension. What am i supposed to do in the meantime if i'm playing a peaceful, cultural civ? I'm forced to self-sabotage my victory condition / playstyle for the entire age of war. Not to mention that these 2 governments are in completely different tech trees.



Later governments are generally better in terms of bonuses, even without the colony cap. I feel that a player who's willing to forgo additional benefits in favor of the ones that best benefit their playstyle / victory condition should have the option, without gimping their empire size.





---------------------------------





In fact, I would argue that IF you ARE going to have colony limits, then governments with LOWER colony caps should get BIGGER bonuses. Imperial gives 20% ship construction, 1 move, a LOSS of 1 diplomacy and has a colony limit of 4. Galactic empire gives 20% ship construction AND soldiering, 30% range, 2 moves, and has a colony limit of 24.



Galactic empire is clearly the better choice, whether you have a 24 colony empire or a 4 colony empire. If you're playing tall and only have 4 planets, then why do you care about the increased colony cap? You're grabbing it because the bonuses are better regardless.



If you're playing wide and have a 20 colony empire, the bonuses from Galactic empire are just that much stronger. More moves means you can defend your larger territory easier, and you've probibly got 4 shipyards each getting 20% bonuses instead of just 1.



Now imagine if imperial gave you a 100% ship construction increase and a bonus of 1 to diplomacy instead of a loss. Playing a small, limited empire is no longer as much of a disadvantage.



In fact, you now have a meaningful choice to make based on your playstyle. Is it better to limit yourself in planets but receive a larger bonus from your smaller, more efficient government? Or is it better to expand but lose some of the bonuses?



I think such an option would increase the depth of the game. Strategy would now play a higher role, and more playstyles can be implemented. Players could chose a smaller, more efficient government with higher bonuses, or one that allows for more worlds at the cost of some bonuses. Colony cap becomes a trade off rather than something that just gets in the way.





----------------------------------





Anyway, if anyone actually bothered to read the whole thing (It got ALOT longer than i planned), what do you think?