There have been several suggestions for dealing with this - making regional controls easier to use, introducing 'decaying' influence, and allowing nations to transfer influence. My suggestion is a bit more radical, but (I think) easier to implement:
EDIT: An alternative to the 20 nation banlist could be to have warzone-style bans. This would remove the issues around long-term members of a feeder community being permanently removed from the region.
Various advantages of this:
- Feeder delegates don't have to worry so much about kowtowing to older residents who aren't necessarily active any more.
- Long-term residents are protected by the limit on the ban-list, which means that very few of them can be removed permanently - especially as the removal of rivals from the region has to be balanced against the occasional need to ban spammers.
- Feeders as a whole become more fluid - delegates rise/fall from power based on their endorsement-count, rather than how long they've been sitting around gathering influence.
- It remains possible for feeders communities to maintain their rule over the region, so long as they are active and vigilant.
- Feeders can't be re-founded, so there is no concern that a dedicated (psychotic?) delegate could attempt this.
- Feeder nations with large amounts of influence still keep their spots in the World Census Report (and in fact, continue to gather influence - it's just useless, like in TRR/Lazarus).
- Alternatively these nations can choose to move their WA status elsewhere (possible to invade/defend), as they don't have to worry about maintaining their influence any more.
Feedback would be appreciated.
*'feeder regions' being defined as the Pacifics only. The Rejected Realms and Lazarus aren't relevant to this, as they can't eject/ban nations.