), but because the bitterness and flaming isn't going to go away any time soon unless there's plans for one hell of a mod crackdown.1. Introduce the founder succession mechanism (i.e. this one).
2. Remove Executive Powers from every WA delegate in every founderless UCR in the game; allow regions with founders to continue to have the option to enable/disable them. This will mean that founderless regions are basically lawless and government-less, outside of game rules/moderation and the ability of those in the region to cooperate. Refounding may become harder but it will never occur against the will of the community.
3. Drastically increase the number of Feeders/Sinkers, so that on average each will wind up having around 1,000 nations. Optionally, change mechanics so that both new and refounded nations spawn in both types, unifying them all under one type. This would increase the number of feeders and sinkers to about 30 (there's currently about 27.2k nations in Feeders/Sinkers). TRR not included; it holds a different role in the game ecosystem anyway.
The end result is that raider/defender gameplay would be restricted to those 30 regions. 1,000 nations is the sweet spot, imho; these regions would remain large enough that being the delegate of one would continue to carry prestige, and that an organized delegate or government would be able to undertake options to defend these regions. It would also make them small enough that couping or raiding one can actually be done by a military force of a group of powerful regions moving at update, but that no current gameplayer force could seriously forcibly hold down more than a couple of GCRs at once, meaning that the world of this form of gameplay is very large and could have a very diverse group of forces behind them; certainly much more diverse than the current group.
PROS:
-Roleplayers and general UCR users will like it because in 99.9% of cases they will no longer be affected by raiding and griefing, even if they go founderless.
-Defenders will like it because it reduces the number of regions that require the support of defenders to a far more manageable number.
-Raiders will like it because there is still a wide body of raid-able regions and each raid they make will be a significant victory worth boasting about.
-General gameplay politicians will like it because it will significantly widen the body of GCRs in the game for which to conduct politics in.
CONS:
-Existing GCRs probably won't like it, because it reduces their current stability.
-Refounding by natives becomes significantly harder and there will be new ways to restrict refounds, such as simply refusing to move your nation out of a region.
-Regions from the pre-founder era that never got one are S-O-L until the Custodian mechanic is available and they can make their case to the WASC.
-Accessibility to the raider/defender game will be reduced to those with understanding of macro influence mechanics.
OTHER:
-Tag raiding will no longer be a thing, and so the Warzones will by default become the probable choice of people looking to train soldiers.
-There will be a massive rush of various forces attempting to take political control over the 20ish new GCRs and things will be weird; but probably much less messier than when Osiris and Balder were created due to the sheer size of the new power vacuum.
I openly admit to having no idea how much coding it would take to implement these changes and will make no assumptions; I also openly admit that certain elements of these suggestions are coloured by my own ideas on current gameplay concepts, and some people can probably guess what they are. I am posting this because I support a collaborative, game mechanic driven shakeup, that will result in improvements for both sides, and even though I don't really believe this topic will result in an answer (nevermind this post exactly as written), I do believe it's worth getting a ball rolling. So here we go.
