Crime & Punishment

No, actually they would make 1 man corps and roll corps in the face of wardeccs. And if you somehow nerfed that, they would just create multiple alts and play on whichever one isn't wardecced. Your attempts to force highsec PvE players into PvP combat will never work...you can't force people to play a game they are not interested in playing.

Nice try....I play Eve...you want to force people into the shoot up other players in highsec without concord interference game...which of course does not exist.

You didn't answer my question.

The majority of systems in new Eden have far fewer restrictions on PvP and the residents have no problem being shot at. They tend to shoot back though, and not with large railguns against an ishkur like most of your customers.

Because alts are still susceptible to the same types of aggression by other players, even if I'm not aware of the alts' existence or identities.

I'm not surprised you don't understand my point of view, because it appears you don't have experience with my play style. I won't be able to convince you with words alone. This is something you'll have to "evolve" into on your own, as I did. I was a null-type player for about four years before I switched over to high-sec around 2008, and then split my time between high-sec and wormhole space when wormholes came out.


Yes, if there were proper incentives. In fact, and although very rare, there have been cases where I was hired to protect industrial corporations from harm. Most, however, prefer the method of protection that involves crying on the forums until changes are made that protect them via NPC-based game mechanics.

I don't consider a "cost" to be the same thing as a "punishment." More like fairness instead. They are getting an increased level of protection, and they should give something up for it. Otherwise the concept of the risk/reward tradeoff goes out the window.

The alternative is that these players shouldn't be able to influence the game world and its economy. Make everything they extract/craft (including raw ISK) permanently bound to their characters, if the process happened while they were in an NPC corporation. They shouldn't be able to buy anything from other players either. Zero impact on the economy that the rest of us have to fight and compete over. That would be fair too.

Other factors go into this too, such as marketing.


Corp-rolling is currently a legitimate method of dealing with this, but it shouldn't be. You should be allowed to escape from a war, but the effect of that should be that you move yourself to an organizational tier that is less efficient than a player corporation. If players don't want to be susceptible to wars, then they should stick to the NPC corporations, and give up an appropriate amount of their income for the added protection.


And why should they be able to affect the way I play, if I can't affect the way they play? Seems like you're relying on a double standard for your argument. Everyone else needs to choose between risk and reward. Why should carebears only have reward?


1. Wasting massive amounts of time and broker fee money to do this, on the off chance that someone will fall for it.

2. That his investments will fail, and money will be lost, because trading doesn't guarantee profits.

3. First of all, "disposable alts" are illegal and can be petitioned, so I'm not even going to address that. As far as the gank itself goes, the ganker is paying a cost for each gank (money and security status), and also risking that the gank will fail.


Why would the economy die? On the contrary, it would flourish, because prices would reflect an actual risk factor.

And I really doubt that CODE would argue against NPC corporation changes just because they use NPC corporations too. In fact, all of their members are advocating the same chances I do. Just because they use absolutely-efficient mechanics that exist today and are available to them, doesn't mean that they don't want them gone.

And finally, with regard to the sandbox bit, you're wrong. Sandbox means that everyone can affect each other equally. "Playing how you want" doesn't mean that you're immune from player interaction. It has nothing to do with wanting others to play my way. Everyone should be able to affect each other equally in a sandbox. Right now, carebears can affect others more than others can affect them. This is a sandbox imbalance.

No, it's a textbook exploit, used by people to cheat their way around the surrender function. Sadly, this exploit has yet to be announced as punishable.

And before you tell me that it's legal, so was ISBoxer, and that changed for the better of the game as a whole.

they are dealing with wars by going npc and not providing you with content and isk, they can still be ganked in npc corps so they are not immune to death.

you dont want to mine so dont make others fight if they dont want to

Here, I'll put this as simply as I can.

If you won't actively participate in the sandbox, if you won't be part of creating content, then the only reason you exist at all is to be content for someone else.