aixo:

Activity rating is not about skill but about activity. Main rating should be Longevity for skill - activity just for adjustment.

To your points...
* Kamikaze players: In the beginning every game is quite dynamic with a lot of fights. No activity rating necessary yet (if drop out activity rating is 0). After eg second round of common stack up start activity rating. In this phase of the game a Kamikazeplayer has normally no chance anymore!

* Truces between small player against big player: Same opinion as you that these games are the most thrilling. And actually would an activity rating probably push such games because everyone gets rewarded.
Small players attack big player and get therefore good activity rating. Big player has to fight a lot to survive -> good activity rating.

When I talked about truces between 3 or more players I meant 3 medium/big players. They will get a negative activity rating because of good size and low fights (spare each other to go against 1/2 other medium players).

Activity: In an endgame the big player is in advantage lets say we got 4 players with (14,7,4,3) territories. This results in (2,1,4/7,3/7) attacks per round. Who would get better activity rating? Lets say activity rating would be done like AS divided into 1st 2nd etc. place. Then a small player would try to attack just to raise his activity, lose, leave a small stack (empty his surplus dice) and thereby lose the game for his allies although the game might have been won.

algios: This rating should be based on number of total countries, border countries total amount of dice in contrast to number of fights.

So a small player has to fight less than a big player to prevent a negative activity rating. eg player with 2 countries has to fight every 4th to 6th round. A player with just one country bordering other countries (sitting on a peninsula) can and has to do just one fight (and this just in case he has enough dice to fully stack up after the end of his round).

Furthermore activity wouldn't have places (so no first for most activ and 7th for least activ). It's an adjustment to Longevity. Rewards for activ players, pointsreduction for inactiv players..

algios: This rating should be based on number of total countries, border countries total amount of dice in contrast to number of fights.

So a small player has to fight less than a big player to prevent a negative activity rating. eg player with 2 countries has to fight every 4th to 6th round. A player with just one country bordering other countries (sitting on a peninsula) can and has to do just one fight (and this just in case he has enough dice to fully stack up after the end of his round).

Furthermore activity wouldn't have places (so no first for most activ and 7th for least activ). It's an adjustment to Longevity. Rewards for activ players, pointsreduction for inactiv players..

algios: This rating should be based on number of total countries, border countries total amount of dice in contrast to number of fights.

So a small player has to fight less than a big player to prevent a negative activity rating. eg player with 2 countries has to fight every 4th to 6th round. A player with just one country bordering other countries (sitting on a peninsula) can and has to do just one fight (and this just in case he has enough dice to fully stack up after the end of his round).

Furthermore activity wouldn't have places (so no first for most activ and 7th for least activ). It's an adjustment to Longevity. Rewards for activ players, pointsreduction for inactiv players..

cant leave any comments??

I wonder why there actually is a sandbox as seperate playing area for this.

Can't we just track both scoring systems parallel for now in normal gaming space?

oh snap