I'd like to refocus on the very important point that the OP made that some folks seem not to grasp at all. In the end, what matters is sustaining a viable population of active players, which includes not only existing players (some of whom necessarily leave as life circumstances or preferences change), but in enticing new players to join and commit in order to maintain that viable pop. Because if that does not happen, Al Kabor will - at some point - wither and die. In essence, like all of life, the universe and everything, this is a struggle against the trend toward max entropy, which is always active.
So the folks who are shrieking about 'fairness' might wanna move up a couple of levels and take a look at the macro picture. It does little good to make things all even-steven (in the eyes of some) if that winds up putting downward pressure on population or activity, which can result in a downward spiral. The point is this: seems to me that the first criteria that should be considered is what kind of pressure (if any) a proposed change would put on an active and vital server population. After all, who would wanna play on the fairest, most balanced server if they were all alone on it?
- Yogi (I'm new here, first post)