Crime & Punishment

Which is exactly what I did, in order to make my point valid. In EVE, war is a business transaction.

you said its like changing your name to avoid paying your debts, its not at all because 90% of wars in eve have nothing to do with debt, and if it is to do with debt (isk) then you act as a bailiff which in most cases is completely legal to ignore. anyway enought of the real life comparisons

npc corp members are denying your isk making so completely legit, isnt that the whole point in eve deny your targets isk and content, running from wardecs are the carebears way to blueball you :)

If that isn't his motivation, then he has absolutely no problems to complain about, since as I've repeatedly stated and you've repeatedly ignore, he can do everything to affect a carebear that that carebear can do to affect him.

In my mind, saying that bumping generates isk the same way mining produces isk, is a bit dumb. It's more like how providing mining boosts would improve the isk/hour, but this is much more RNG based.

@the person that said nothin gin the game is RNG based for income, dead space farmers/officer/faction farmers disagree. They might make isk while attempting their primary income (via bounties/overseers drops), but their primary income is RNG based.

And at the person I quoted, creating an alt to ganks nd then recycling him because that's his purpose and it's fulfilled is against the rules. But if he's a station trading alt and you decide you're bored of that and decide to start suicide ganki and end up deleting him, that's allowed. You might've been saying that and I just misunderstood.

The business transaction is between you and concord, that's unaffected. If you pay a policeman to look the other way when you punch anyone sitting in seat 14A, that doesn't cover you if the person moves to 16G. If your target is small enough that destroying their corp is a viable option then your choice of target was at fault, plain and simple. Wardecs are not a method for forcing conflict on specific players, it's a way to fight a group. If that group disbands and those same players get together elsewhere, that's tough luck to you buddy, pick a target where that's not a suitable option.

And they can affect you in *exactly the same ways*. You keep saying carebears affect you but you can't affect them. You can do everything they can do. You can affect each other in the exact same ways. You want to be able to shoot them because they won't shoot back, and you#re upset that they are able to evade you.

Mission running has the exact same forms of risk as trading. You will only lose isk in trading if you mess up or if someone actively attacks you at great cost to themselves, just like you will only lose isk in missioning if you mess up or if someone attacks you.

And what proof would you like exactly? It's common knowledge that players use NPC alts to do trade in highsec. You know that proof it pretty much impossible to come by which is why you are demanding it. Just look for example though at the 2 main high sec hauling outfits being red-frog and pushx, both of which use NPC alts to haul, or pro-synergy the salvaging group that uses NPC alts to salvage. Honestly, at this point you're clearly either trolling for this point or you have absolutely no clue what you are chatting about, either way I'm done with you on this point.

And you have exactly the same opportunities as they do. Do you not understand how ridiculous this claim is? You are claiming it's impossible to affect people without shooting them, yet in the same breath you are claiming that carebears are affecting you without shooting you. One of those claims must be incorrect.

You're right. Someone should not be become immune from repaying their debts by changing their name.
It also seems reasonable that someone being chased by a contract killer is within their rights to skip town or enter witness protection or change their identity.

Just because you and a client have an arrangement or you've paid a wardec fee doesn't mean the target has to meekly come to your party.




Yeah and I bet They are really upset They can't stop you doing Tutorials or browsing ISIS or mining in Their infinite belts or talking to Their Research agents or manufacturing the same things They do.
Oh and infinite resources eh ? Better tell all those renters in Null they should come back to high sec.

Unless you are recreating him to do something that negative sec status is bad for, it's no different from not ever logging him on again. If the issue they had was with deleting negative sec status chars, then you wouldn't be able to delete them with negative sec status, just like how you can't delete them if they are a corp CEO. The rule is there to stop people repeatedly recycling alts to repeat tasks which your character is receiving consequences for. Recycling alts to awox is also against the rules for example. Creating a disposable character (a character you intend to use for one purpose then delete) is not against the rules.

See above.

Not really. If you just didn't log him in you're avoiding those penalties just as much. It's only when you recreate the character that you regain the opportunities you had with that character prior to their ganking, without having to deal with those consequences. That's what the issue is with.

That's not really correct either. The prices of those rare modules are player-driven. Loot drops from destroyed players are RNG-driven though.


I don't have that much of an issue with this. If they disband the corporation, there are still drawbacks for them such as being unable to maintain a POS reliably, massive corp histories that negatively impact reputability, and the general managerial hassles of having to create the corporation anew. It's not a perfectly balanced system, however.


They can affect me by affecting my risk/reward ratios, but I can't do the same to them because their activities inherently have zero risk attached. I have both systematic and nonsystematic risks in my activities, but their activities only have systematic risk, because they can completely eliminate their nonsystematic risk by following widely-available instructions. Like I said before, all you need in order to be able to survive a mission is to have a tank above a certain level. That's a guarantee. I can't guarantee the success of a gank no matter what I do, even if I'm able to minimize the risks significantly.

Trading doesn't have nonsystematic risks at all.

"Messing up" isn't a risk, or at the very least, isn't a systematic risk.


You're the one who made a concrete claim (you didn't even try to say something that would make it seem like an opinion), so the onus is on you to prove it.

But now that you've been asked to present some proof as to its validity, you of course accuse the other party of "trolling" and state how you're "done" with them. Well-played. Very classy.

You win, of course. No one can put up a fight with that sort of argument.


They are able to affect me without shooting me because their economic activities determine the inherent risk/reward calculations that drive my play style. With proper economic manipulation, they can ensure that all ganks and wars are unprofitable. I can't do the same to them (note: without ganking them, although this would likely result in a net loss for myself), because their activities result only in profit. I can start mining myself, and make them earn less money, but only insofar as everyone is earning less money; they will still experience pure profit, regardless of my own economic output. You simply fail to see how the pvp:pve relationship works in this game.

Not enough. There should be more, as is evident by the lack of incentives that results in so many people foregoing player corporations.


And yet, despite not achieving perfection, the system would still be improved.


Correct. Except you forgot the part where such reactive measures are usually costly, but in EVE, the cost is nonexistent.

Well go argue this with CCP. That's not how their rule is designed or how it's enforced. A disposable character is fine, repeatedly rerolling an alt to repeat a task without receiving the consequences of that task is not. If you think that neg sec status characters should just not be allowed to be deleted, go make a F&I thread about it, it's a pretty simple change.