And sorry to bother you.

I have commented in the past about this and I will comment now. People can't hold pantheons(or most people can't) or don't find it worthwhile, because pans will be attacked by many  coalitions in a semi-dead condition made up by accounts also called alts(who are not actually active players) , by few people that coordinate them.

 One solution to this problem is dealing with alts. But I think it is complicated ,and  it will not solve the problem entirely; if you can ,however , I welcome this.

Solution is to keep these coalitions that are used as leverage and power multipliers out of the pantheon game. And of course not only the inert caolitions but the active ones that stay out of the pantheon game so they don't have vulnerabilities as they perceive them. But a war game without vulberabilities is not a war game. Hence my suggestions in the past , "no level 5 pantheon in your team , you can't attack a level 5" , and other elaborate schemes.

Any measures taken, should be directed against these players that took a good platftorm with well-meant features and  tried to turn a strategy game into a world-building one, by negating balanced fights, and by denying to use their own troops at the expense of their opponents..