James Heard said:
I think it's because your total came closest to the mythical 400 IC average I was thinking about with reasonable explanations for how to balance it without much thought.
First, thanks for compiling the info, and for taking the time to make suggestions. Just wanted to point out that I appreciate the time spent, even if I pretty much wholly disagree with you
For starters, I'm not sure where the 400 IC suggestion comes from -- is it based on looking at the rules, seeing how many ICs you'd need to make X amount of progress on Turn 1, or...? At the moment, the average is 350 (well, 350 point something), so unless there's some reason to shift the overall balance of power upward, I don't see why we don't balance around that.
Further, I don't know that ICs are even the best measuring stick of power in the game... They're the clearest, sure, and from a strictly mechanical end, they're all but the whole story. However, that doesn't fully account for the way the game will actually play out...
- First, it ignores any starting PLs, which can be very significant (Rikandur having the demi-god Iuz in play goes a long way to overcoming its IC deficit, as do Anabster's presumed 3 Epic PLs, though not quite so far in that case) -- until these get accounted for, it'll be hard to balance on anything but speculation.
- Second, it ignores the role of territory. Even though territory basically gets reduced to ICs mechanically, from a strategic perspective it is definitely significant: The Nyr Dyv Summit wouldn't be underway if it wasn't

Territory can become a mitigating factor, as well: Those factions with large ICs who are stuck on isolated continents or planets are going to have some trouble getting much going (although that's a two-way street; it also protects them from having to deal with much danger, and ultimately might allow them to just lay back and develop while everyone else skirmishes themselves into oblivion.)
- Third, it ignores the variety of other, nuanced circumstantial influences which impact the balance of power. The Circle of Eight, for instance, won't be forming an alliance with the Triumvirate Rebellious any time soon -- that's a very real limitation to both factions, but one with no mechanical basis... There are examples of this to be found in examining the relationship of any two factions (to some extent), adding up to a net "alliance potential" that will favor some over others.
Finally, I'd like to point out that the system does not require perfect balance between all factions; only that all factions are strong enough to be competitive, and that no faction is so strong as to be immune to competition. I think, with just a bit of pinching, we're close to being there already.
The reason you can get away with this is that the game is almost naturally self-balancing. A faction with a large population but poor strategic territory will look to deal with a faction that has the opposite; if their population advantage is especially large, they're likely to be fairly generous in these deals as an enticement, resulting in a general balancing. More generally, I'd say that the larger powers will tend to ally with the smaller powers, while the middle powers will tend to stay allied along the middle... My reasoning being that is long and probably flawed, so let me just call it a general prediction.
I certainly wouldn't press a trait onto anyone, and fully admit that I didn't check too closely (or know where to look) to find former traits - but just for acknowledgement's sake, what does everyone think about the new traits like Good and Spelljammer?
Spelljammer trait: All their armies can attack any point? That's huge, IMO unless I'm vastly overrating the role of territory... Considering Zelda/Airwhale are pretty much right on the average ATM, I don't see why this is necessary, either.
Good trait: Not even looking at balance here, that rule just sounds like no fun. And no fun is no good.
Anyway, that's my piece for the night... I hate to just disagree and run without presenting alternatives, so I'll be sure and post some alternative suggestions tomorrow.