it is inefficient for a landtrader to have milstrat therefore a tyranny with milstrat could treat a landtrader as up to 168% bigger than they actually are

making your example equivalent to a 22k grabbing a 67.2k or over 3x bigger

the obvious way to landtrade is have a set of conditions which if me mean a second hit isnt triggered

i hear all this stuff about getting just below the l:l thresholds but i never bother doing it myself and never notice other people doing it, assuming you want an extra hit all you ever have to do is gain enough nw to reduce the first grab, but unless it was an edge case i doubt its worth it, and people tend not to change milstrat % a lot either, but it boils down to you hit them trying to benefit, why should you expect them not to benefit? or to stop you from doing it again if it annoys them?

and yes there are obvious easy ways to balance landtrading, either boost grabbing (bots) and exploring (brackets, or send mil out exploring) or nerf landtrading (DR's, more csites lost, or make cs losses higher if nw of attacker is close to or lower your own nw, only affects landtraders not farmed countries, or convert ghost acres into lost acres in line with % of current acres grabbed per recent period, which would cause landtrading to slow down as much as desired, or do it with a flat rate so 100 acres grabbed meant 100 ghost were lost from you instead to completely nerf it, an exponential formula to make it begin to kick in at x acres and not matter much at 5k when exploring is still sort of competitive)

when the 6m acre countries were a problem my preferred solution was to nerf ghost acres based on percentage of land unbuilt in the grabbing country on an exponential formula, its easy to make a formula like that to make landtrading just plain stop working at a certain point