So I'm going to say something possibly more controversial than usual.
With this talk about more agriculture detail, or religion refinements, I think this is distracting to the game. I think it harms it more than bring good. There is a certain balance for features, and I think we're going to an extreme.
If these features help people find this game more interesting. The current atmosphere feels a lot like we're trying to cram too many things into a single game. It may not necessarily work as a whole.
Don't believe me? Well, how many new players stay on now? Why do they stay? Now, for the veterans, why did you stay?
For me, it was interaction. It had nothing to do with features and I couldn't have cared less how realistic the religions or battles were. It was all about talking to other people. It was unique for its setting and lore. The features were a nice embellishment, but by no means did they make the game for me.
I think I am far from alone in thinking this.
What drives people away is forced micro-management, like the estates.
What I propose is optional micro-management. I don't hear anyone quit because bureaucrats allow region stats to be higher than they otherwise would be. Or because of how one can increase scout or caravan production by building more of their buildings, or how finding the right numbers to host a successful and profitable tournament can be tricky. This is because these things aren't required to continue playing the game. Lords aren't forced to build RCs, why would they be forced to build better agricultural infrastructure? The way I see it, they grant more opportunities to people, while not penalizing those who couldn't care less for them. This is not the type of feature that drives people away, those are rather along the lines of estates and treaty friction.
