Sovereignty should cost more for unused space

Sparked by a discussion with u/HendrinkCollie on Reddit, it occurred to me that the bills for holding sovereignty for systems that are used lightly or not at all should scale rapidly upwards.

So instead of the old system of a flat fee for an iHub, for cyno jammers etc, the cost for each would rise rapidly as an inverse of the system activity indices, making holding sov that one doesn’t use much more expensive. This could only be partially mitigated by the roaming ratting fleets that we see.  In some cases (EC-, HED etc) such underused systems would still be worthwhile for strategic reasons.  In others, far less so.

I don’t suggest this as a replacement for any existing feature, just an additional feature to further open up unused systems to the sort of small stakeholders that we see in places like Cloud Ring. What do people think?

  • Rob Kaichin

    More of a general question than a specific observation, but here goes.

    CCP has incentivised heavily the ‘right way’ of holding sov. You cannot ‘AFK’ sov, you cannot hold sov and attack all over the map. They’ve also increased the ‘ISK generating power’ of sov for the largest groups. The proposed change falls into line with this philosophy.

    In short, there’s CCP’s way, or there’s other space.

    Is this fair/right/good?

    Rob K.