Crime & Punishment

I'm not saying there's no other factors, but losing players because you don't like them won't make the game more advertised either.

Of course it should be. If you pick a target which is small enough that they can pack up their entire corp and move to a new entity, then that's your target selection at fault. People shouldn't be punished for wanting to live in highsec and not wanting to be targets of highsec wardec farmers.

You can affect them as much as they can affect you. Your problem is that you want to affect them more and in different ways. Tough. And carebears don't only have reward. You're just upset that you can't provide the largest level of risk.

Lol, you really misunderstand trading and scamming if you really think there's significant risk and cost involved. It takes about 10 minutes with no training to get a scam up and running. You don't even need to invest isk, just offer to double some money. Trading is ludicrously easy to minimise risk. And yes, of course you'll lose isk if you make massive mistakes and fail, just like if you set up a missioning ship wrong, hit triggers too early, get scrammed and die, or set up your mining in such a way that you can't tank rats.

Disposable alts aren't against the rules. Recycling alts is, but creating an alt that you entirely do not care about is a massive part of the game. Having -10 sec status on a ganking alt doesn't affect your mains ability to play normally in highsec.

Why would the economy die if NPC corp players were not able to affect anyone? Perhaps because the economy is primarily run by NPC corp alts, and the removal of the majority of the economy wouldn't end well.

I'm not saying code would argue against it, it's just one example of people who are not "carebears" (arguable) who use NPC alts frequently.

And no, a sandbox game is just a game where the no specific win conditions or progression mechanics. In a sandbox game you come in and you do what you want. Whether or not you affect other people and how much you affect them is entirely up to you. And how exactly can a carebear affect you more than you can affect them? You can do EVERYTHING a carebear can do. Again, your issue is that you can't affect them in the way you want to. Tough.

I dont think youve read most of the argument here, regarding high npc taxes to push people into player corps and punishment/restrictions for leaving player corps during war to provide merc corps with meaning amd contemt

Nope, it's perfectly legit. If a corp is small enough that collapsing and reforming is a viable option, you picked the wrong targets, so stop being terrible. I imagine that if CCP ever do announce this to be an exploit it will come hand in hand with changes to wardec mechanics which people like yourself hate far more, as CCP likely have no intention of forcing players to be unwilling targets of a wardec.

EDIT: And amusingly, there's already the discussion of potential "social corps" which would offer a non-wardec alternative.

ISBoxer is still legal FYI, and it's yet to be seen that it's better for anyone. People are still whining non-stop about multiboxers, just CCP are getting a few PLEX less consumed per month.

I've advocated for precisely that for a long time now, so yes I know what it is.

NPC corp members (at present including my sadly unemployed self) should be subject to larger tax rates if they are more than 60 days old.

And leaving a corp during a war should generate killrights on the person leaving.

The problem with highsec right now, is that it has too many mechanics, stacked on top of one another, that discourage player interaction and conflict. That leads to stagnation, and boredom, and eventually unsubs.

Ill make it simple, if a merc or ganker can use npc corps to enhance their playstyle (bumping machariels and neutral logistics) with no punishment or restriction then whats the problem with other people using npc corps to enhance there own playstyle without punishment or restriction?

Disposable implies that an alt is thrown away or destroyed after use, which is against the rules as for all intents and purposes you're "recycling" it for another one.

Gankers use disposable ships, they don't use disposable alts. You need to find another word.

A player corporation isn't a right; it's an ability with significant capability to affect the game environment around it. It's an ability that one must be able to defend in order to be entitled to. The miners should either forego this option since they can't defend it, or find someone who is willing to. Risk and reward.


Putting 18b on the line in a single trip means that the pilot made an error. Taking on additional risk shouldn't guarantee additional reward. It's a calculation that must be performed on an individual basis.

And for the record, I think the neutral bumpers being immune to wars is just as bad.


Yes, regardless of the fact that doing this results in a suspect flag.


I absolutely can. Just because a feature is imbalanced doesn't make one a hypocrite if they use it just to stay competitive if everyone else can use it too. The fact that you're relying on this sort of argument shows that you have the logical capabilities of a twelve-year-old, no offense. Even Veers would shake his head at this, if not outwardly admit it.


Correct; it's just that the drawbacks for doing this are miniscule.

That's like saying that someone should be immune from having to repay debts just because they change their name.

War in EVE is a business transaction, and a very legal/legitimate one at that.


Incorrect. I can't affect them in any way but violence. High-sec has infinite resources, and I can't grab the missions they were going to get for myself, or mine out their ore so they can't have any because it respawns. I can't affect them in any way that doesn't involve the barrel of a gun, and without affecting them, they have 100% reward and 0% risk.


"Significant" is subjective. However, I'm glad that we've established that these activities have objective risk. Unlike, say, mission-running, where the danger comes in the form of the NPCs doing a set amount of damage, meaning that you have exactly zero risk as long as you exceed this value with your tank after finding out what it is from one of the many online sources available.


Incorrect on all counts. Especially the part about the economy being run by NPC corp alts. However, since you're making that claim, I will allow you the chance of presenting evidence to prove it.


None of those actions would actually affect them, as explained before, due to the fact that high-sec has an infinite amount of resources.

Why should one be pushed in NPC Corp?

just because some players are thinking, only fighting would be the right way... nope folks.
Everyone, can and has to play the game on a way wich is the best for him self.

Death threats are illegal. EVE wars aren't.


Not punished for being in NPC corps, but rewarded for being in player corps.

I'd be just fine if CCP left all current game mechanics intact, but added a 1.5x multiplier on all money-making activity for player corporation members.