I´ll do my best!

I do encounter 4 5 times the situation, my believe is that what we call barrck exploit should not occur, simply cause the recipient is not the emitent of the inflicted concept [ ownership]. so, adressing it as exploit/bug/hack it fair act by me, on contrary, deployed values as equal oportunities became a nonfucntional fair game rule.  good point adressing the issue, hope you will adress other garbage thing too.

Just in case, when I say "towns in Carpetania would be aligned with Rome", I mean historically. They would still be populated mostly by natives. When I say "particularly around Segobriga", I mean that, even when the arrows point to it, it should not be taken by the player (same with Toletum), not to have so easily an early CC (or, at least, it should be far from optimal, considering the Roman army presence there also).

I have been toying around with potential fixes for this issue. I had tried to counter TerritoryDecay to trigger only when the relevant territory was owned by an actual enemy, preventing neutral or one-sided allied barrack influence from draining capture points during a ceasefire. That had mixed success so I then attempted to block CC placement within 200 meters of another placed CC and I think I might prefer that method as it would also reduce arguments in-game when people place too closely together.  I'd appreciate feedback / thoughts from players. 

Screenshot ideas below for what I had been thinking for re-using the top ribbon space, or a kinda dropdown from the diplomacy icon