Hi all! I love Humankind and have been playing since launch, and I think that the game overall is in great health. There are a few areas that I think are in dire need of rework (Religion being a glaring weak point), but this thread is more about a few smaller scale ideas I've had over the years that I think could really improve the overall quality of life of the game as a whole. I'd love to hear any and all thoughts on any or all of these ideas. Cheers!

Independent People
The addition of Client States is hands down one of the single best updates this game has ever had, in my opinion, but I think there's room for even more expansion of it. Anything that makes Independent People a more vital part of the strategy of the game can only be a good thing, so here are a few thoughts on Client States:

- Unique types of Independent People (beyond just Passive and Aggressive) that yield unique bonuses as a Client State. Effectively a "Legacy Trait" for each of the Independent People that you inherit for your empire as long as they are a Client State. This adds further viability to Client Stating, and makes IPs that much more important to interact with. (RedSirus has a great thread about this that goes into deeper detail titled "[Idea] Give Independent Peoples distinct benefits" that is worth a read!)
- Scaling FIMS for Client State is something that it seems is intended, but doesn't really feel like it has worked in implementation, so let's overhaul it. Rather than FIMS from Client States/Treaties being based on Districts/Infrastructures, instead have it scale based on how long they have been a Client State. As an example, start at a baseline of 50 per turn of each of the available FIMS, then scale it at +1 each turn that the IP remains a Client State for your Empire. This not only puts more control in the hand of the player over how the FIMS scale, but it also puts emphasis on Client Stating early and then maintaining that relationship. Speaking of...
- Holding a Client State, let alone multiple, feels more difficult than it should at higher difficulties. I think an easy solution would be a new short-term Treaty, available after signing a Client State Treaty, that lasts for 10 or 15 turns, which locks in that Client State for the duration of the Treaty, no matter what happens with the percentage share. For X amount of Influence (higher or lower depending on your percentage share) you can sign a Treaty to lock in the Client State for X turns, and renewing the Treaty could be done even if you fall under the 60% threshold, but you only have the renewal turn to sign it before you lose them as a Client State entirely (unless you regain the 60%).

Emblematic Districts
A couple of simple ones here, but one that has been sorely needed for quite some time, and another that I think would just be a good general quality of life improvement:
- Either all Emblematic Districs should be purchasable with Influence in unattached territories, or none of them should. I understand that Havens/Cothons/etc. count as Harbors and Harbors are able to be purchased with Influence in unattached territories, but this has always given the Harbor-based Cultures a distinct advantage over the others, especially considering how cheap the Influence purchase actually is. Personally, I'd like to see all Emblematic Districts be able to be bought in with Influence, but removing Harbors (and Emblematic Harbors) as purchasable in this way is equally viable.
- Retain the ability to build old Emblematic Districts, but exclusively as an Influence buy out. You could also just increase the Industry cost, scaling by Era, but I like the idea of an Influence buy out being the only way to get old Emblematic Districts from past Cultures. Not only does it give you something to spend your Influence on in the late game, but overall just being able to continue building EDs (albeit at a higher/different cost from the Culture they belong to) just makes sense.

Emblematic Units
An easy one here, but Emlematic Units should have a unique upgrade path that doesn't change them into the next level unit, but rather just increases their strength to the same level while retaining their unique look and abilities. They don't even have to be a stronger version of whatever that Era's comparable unit is, and really they shouldn't; their higher strength is relative to the Era they belong to, but their unique abilities are what make them fun to play with. This is admittedly probably an unpopular idea, but I just hate it when I have an awesome Emblematic Unit with a cool ability that eventually becomes obsolete on strength alone. I just think being able to upgrade strength without losing abilities (or looks) makes for a more fun (albeit admittedly probably less realistic in some situations) overall combat experience.

Government

Okay, so this one is a bit of a bigger one, but Government in the game (or lack thereof) feels like a tremendous opportunity being currently missed. Yes, there are paths you can take on the Civics Tree to technically establish a Government of sorts for your Empire, but a lot of it hardly feels as meaningful or impactful as something as important as Government should be. I think mostly divorcing Government from the Civics Tree (you could still let the Civics Tree be how things are unlocked and such) and letting it stand alone as its own unique component of the game is a much needed addition, and would add just even more depth to the already really strong axis system of leadership. Adding the ability to enact specific policies, perhaps even having some that are universal for all Governments and others that are unique to speicific Governments, and even introducing the concept of unique Governors that oversee each city and each offer specific bonuses for their cities, but being locked behind levels of Government or some other mechanic. These are all things that have been done in other 4X games to varying degrees of success, but I think within the structure of Humankind could be wildly successful and add a tremendous amount of depth and further make every game a unique and differentiated experience if done right.

If you've made it this far, thank you for coming to my Ted Talk! I love this game and think that it is very solid as is, but also see enormous potential for growth and expansion (which Amplitude have already demonstrated a few times in their major updates). Again, please feel free to share your own thoughts on my ideas; I'd love to know if I'm the only one who feels a certain way, or if others agree, or maybe you're in between with a similar but tweaked version of one (or more) of my ideas! Either way, take care, and have a wonderful day!