The assumptions you're making don't take into account aid slots. Large nations can only buy as much tech as they can import. The largest buyers cannot monopolize sellers they can't possibly use up all of the aid slots. As I keep saying that there are natural limits within the game that would mitigate "tech-magedon" after a very short period of time.
In fact, bringing down warchests, reducing the amount of tech in the game and giving newer nations a faster path to relevance are all rock solid reasons to uncap aid. Smaller warchests mean that wars will be more well considered and meaningful. Inflationary pressure on tech costs potentially leading to a tech shortage would mean slow the expansion between the haves and the have nots. And ultimately, despite your earlier assertion, there are many, many new nations who have deleted because the game doesn't develop fast enough for them. That being said, even with accelerated growth new nations would still need to build wonders which limit them from being nation-zillas in a short period of time.
You make some good points here. Specifically about the game not developing fast enough for new players. I don't think this is the main reason people quit, but its probably a contributing factor. On the other hand, I've never heard new players complain about this. I won't disagree with most of this, but I cant agree with it either.
A few things Id like to point out:
1. I don't think the aid cap should be removed. I really think there needs to be a limit. Removing the aid cap would allow alliances to rebuild much faster than before. Possibly instantly. I imagine alliances won't be aid bombing all their new members for free, however, It wouldn't be too hard strategically boost certain nations. The cost would be high, but the long term return is higher.
Im not sure if it would work the same way in CN, but in another game which had no cap, the building strategy because of this was as follows:
*All top nations in the AA save their collections for X amount of days.
*They then collect and send all of the collection to a small nation.
*Small nation uses this money to build up, and the high cost is no problem, because that nation can now make tons of cash.
*The process is then repeated with each new nation.
Just a thought.
2. This kind of ability to build/rebuild so fast isn't very fair to the small/mid sized AAs that don't have that spending power. Right now, all alliances are limited to rebuilding at a certain rate. A bit of an equalizer.
3. If we want to let new nations develope faster, Id say increase the aid limits again. But I still think growing new nations too fast will damage the tech market, so I think "how much" needs to be considered carefully.
4. CN is losing players because people have lives and these games aren't too popular these days. This is probably the biggest factor in why the tech market would run dry if nations grow too fast. In fact, this is probably how the game will eventually die, unless its popularity increases and people stick around.
These are just the thoughts I had. I really think there should be a limit. Removing the cap would give a lot more power to money and the big cash producing nations.
If they uncap the aid, I'd pay 10 BN for 100k tech.
Well if tech sellers start realising they can get better offers from larger nations because tech starts getting more difficult to find, theyll likely start bartering, but likely, even before then. Yes, as Bob said, the community as a whole could potentially stabilize it but only if everyone is following the same program.
On the other hand, its possible this may not happen at all. But the possibility of it happening is greatly increased with no aid cap.
Some people are willing to spend more on tech than others. Thats why we have 6/100 and 6/200 deals that people argue about. One is the same price for half the tech, regardless, there's no shortage of people more than willing to pay for it.