Again this is naive thinking. Just remove votes and just let players get on with a spaceship simulator.This is why I proposed the Emmissaries idea - if you could more or less guarantee the top three systems would be decided by leadership, who have been placed there by sheer performance (as rubbernuke effectively wants), would that not be enough to shave off 5C to an acceptable point?
Alternatively (or collectively), don't remove voting but instead shift its importance in the overall movements of a Power. We're talking a pretty stout overhaul, but what if CC generation and expenditure was primarily driven by active commanders rather than on their numbers of votes? There's a lot of ways to potentially do this, but consider this:
Now you've created a system where botting is effectively necessary to 'game the system' with multiple accounts - an action Frontier can easily detect and prevent. 5C elements still exist - allowing minor political intrigue - but it is restricted to highly active commanders, representative of their right to dedicate time sabotaging a power at the expense of not being able to easily support one simultaneously. A highly dedicated player might manage a 3:1 or 4:1 ratio of highly active commanders, but most players won't put in that kind of effort and...even if they did...we'd see a larger balancing take place across all factions.
- You can cast a vote once pledged (that doesn't change - so unlimited accounts still in play)
- To cast a vote costs merits or some similar currency that must be actively acquired
- The amount of merits required to cast a single vote is balanced around ~12 hours of gameplay or more
- Higher ranks can cast more votes for less merits (highly active accounts outpace lower 'massed' accounts)