But it is about overall numbers, it is the root and basis of this problem.
No, it isn't.
Everything you're saying is based on one erroneous premise, which is that the players for any given country are usually distributed more or less evenly between the respective fronts for that country's two opponents. In other words, you're assuming that generally, if there are 100 bish, 80 rooks, and 80 nits on, the rooks are being fought by 40 nits and 50 bish, the nits are being fought by 40 rooks and 50 bish, and the bish are being fought by 40 rooks and 40 nits and thus have an "excess" of 20 players.
But that is rarely the case. More likely the bish are being fought by 78 rooks and 77 nits and all of 5 nits and rooks are fighting each other. So the bish's "excess" of 20 players disappears and instead they're outnumbered 3-2 across both fronts.
Change any of the country names around and it's equally true, and that or a lesser version (where, say, 20-30 of the rooks and nits are fighting each other and the bish are "only" outnumbered 1.3 to 1) is what you usually see in the MA.
The dynamics of a 3-way game are nothing at all like those of a 2-way game.
How is stricter eny going to make it worse? and on who?
Stricter ENY will make it worse because it will give that much more incentive for the smaller sides not to fight each other at all, because if they gang the larger side they'll have the numbers AND the enemy will be flying crappy ENY 30+ planes against low-cost perk rides.
There's little more annoying than being outnumbered almost 2-1 and having the other side show up in Tempests and 262s while you're stuck in P-40s and A6M2s.
BUT even then, we're still talking about overall numbers, which have
NOTHING to do with hordes. You badly misunderstand why and how hordes form. It's the result of an aggregate of individual decisions by individual players to lump together, not the result of some commanding general's decision to use his extra assets in a particular way.
