Being able to leave your guild and jump into a ghost guild is pretty much what keeps GvG from not sinking today. Sure, remove this ability and you'll make GvG even more boring. If it weren't for the ghost guilds, most guilds wouldn't have anything to do in todays GvG, atleast ghost jumping offers some kind of action. I'm not saying that ghost guilds is a good solution, but instead of adding even more limitations such as the one you suggest, try to solve the actual problem instead. And what's the problem? I think that everyone already knows, but... Siege costs. Reduce the costs and you'll propably see more action without ghost guilds
Just set a fixed cost regardless of how many sectors your guild controls. To be honest I don't see the logical reasoning that Inno has used when deciding that there should be raised costs just because a guild already controls a large area. Its like my phone would last 3 days on it's current battery, but if I get 2 phones, it will just last for 2 days :confused: Sure, it can cost to send out a siege, but the costs to send this siege should not raise depending on earlier sieges With a fixed cost of, for instance, 30 of each good, there would be no profit at all in using ghost guilds, simply because the main guild could do the work instead And yes, it's just a matter of time untill someone says "what about the small guilds???" ... well, get stronger, that's how nature works 
To be honest I don't see the logical reasoning that Inno has used when deciding that there should be raised costs just because a guild already controls a large area. Its like my phone would last 3 days on it's current battery, but if I get 2 phones, it will just last for 2 days :confused: Sure, it can cost to send out a siege, but the costs to send this siege should not raise depending on earlier sieges
I believe the logical reasoning was "We want to encourage many guilds to get into GvG and by restricting the size a guild can grow to in each province it gives others a better chance to at least get something". In a sense it allows the strong guilds to still gain the most sectors but not all. Other smaller guilds can jump in and give it a shot and will most likely only end up with a small number of sectors. While I'm sure this was the intent I'm not sure it is working that way...
I also don't think you can liken this to phone batteries either, I think of it as in land maintenance (golf courses possibly). If you want to own 9 holes you'd be paying less than what you would to try and own all 18. Not exactly what is happening but close
While fixing the cost does remove the need to use ghost guilds it runs the risk of "cashed up" guilds from dominating the landscape to the point where there would be even less guilds involved as it is so cheap to push new guilds back off the map. I can't say for sure that is what would happen but there is that risk. Not to mention how hard it would be to find 1 price that "most" could agree on
Not all servers are as populated as the .EN, and on less populated servers 50-60% of the province is still controlled by npc's. InnoGames tried to create some sort of balance that wasn't required, and now it's just making GvG slow and boring. I'd like to refer to a realistic example: There's no restrictions in how much land a country can control, but still there's not one single country that controls the entire world. Sure, some countries have tried, but failed, and I belive that this exact thing would also happen in the game. If one guild would be close to control the entire province, some other guilds would quickly raise in strength in order to balance it out. The balance of nature Let me give another example. Imagine a war were you need to control multiple sectors and you send out a team of choppers for each of these sectors. It requires 50 gasoline (just an example) to fuel one chopper and each siege requires a team of 4 choppers. This means that for each sector you take, it will cost 200 gasoline. However, it will not cost more gasoline per chopper if you already control a number of sectors, and you won't need more choppers to take the next sector I think that 30 of each good would be a good cost, considering that it requires multiple sieges to take a sector that is controlled by an active guild I'd like to refer to a realistic example: There's no restrictions in how much land a country can control, but still there's not one single country that controls the entire world. Sure, some countries have tried, but failed, and I belive that this exact thing would also happen in the game. If one guild would be close to control the entire province, some other guilds would quickly raise in strength in order to balance it out. The balance of nature
Haha ok, you might have a point
Yeah maybe, but I don't think that there's 1 single server that only contains 1 cashed up guild. In most cases we are talking about multiple strong guilds that will most likely fight each other sooner or later
Personally I would like to see if a fixed price would indeed work, just not sure if Inno will share that view...
As he didn't mention another source, you are actually speculating too
)So we are allowed to talk about this, and any thoughts about it, but mentioning a fixed amount of days is a no-no since it didn't come from this server