It makes no sense to me that the end game triggered by pollution should have a winner. I mean, everybody lost, right? (like is supposed to happen in real world) But assuming we still declare a winner, it shouldn't be the one that polluted the world in the first place! It is currently a valid strategy: pollute the world, end the game quicker, win the game. But you just destroyed the world, how can you still win the game?


So I think pollution should take some fame away, and a LOT of fame if the world comes to an end because of it, in order to prevent the biggest polluters from winning. Players would still be able to get that fame back if they reduce pollution along the game.