These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

War Decs as a griefing tool

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#801 - 2014-09-03 18:21:25 UTC
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
I've said this before, but I'll say it again.


EVE is a game about choice when it all comes down to it, its the main driving force of EVE. And your choices should have full effect on you.



There should not be, a safe haven, or partial safe haven, where a player can not be harmed. His actions should have full repercussions, and he should be held liable for his actions if he is not capable of prevent them from happening to him.


NPC corps give a massive amount of protection. Wardecs should be avoid not by dropping corp, but either by learning to play the game from a PVP aspect. or learning how to avoid them without dropping your corp. It isn't about E-honor, or anything like that.


Fundamentally dropping to a NPC removes choice and action from the game, and it shouldn't be allowed.


EDIT: I can also get behind what Steppa has suggested. A sort of social club rather than a real corp.


Well said.
Revival1984 Revivis
Knee Pads Only
#802 - 2014-09-11 09:34:25 UTC
I think the price for wardecs should increase to 50million isk per corporation in that alliance.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#803 - 2014-09-11 09:36:54 UTC
Revival1984 Revivis wrote:
I think the price for wardecs should increase to 50million isk per corporation in that alliance.


Agreed. That way, I can make a few dozen alts, train them as CEOs of a few dozen frivolous corps, make an alliance with lots of corps that never log on, and be a one-many army that costs 600 mil to wardec.

I like the way you think. +1.

Note: in case you couldn't tell, I'm being sarcastic. Of course, if this were actually implemented, then I would totally do this.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#804 - 2014-09-11 09:37:56 UTC
Revival1984 Revivis wrote:
I think the price for wardecs should increase to 50million isk per corporation in that alliance.


Don't necro threads.

And your price hike would be fine, as soon as it is not possible to jump corp with zero consequences. My personal suggestion has been for some time to generate killrights for anyone who leaves corp during a war. Although I have also recently gotten behind locking them out of joining any other player corp for a week after leaving.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#805 - 2014-09-11 14:27:28 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
And I remember some of the things I posted on these forums, and how wrong I was.
lol I remember them too, I was amongst those telling you how wrong you wereP

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Shecky THCfan
Red vs Blue Flight Academy
#806 - 2014-09-11 21:29:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Shecky THCfan
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
I've said this before, but I'll say it again.


EVE is a game about choice when it all comes down to it, its the main driving force of EVE. And your choices should have full effect on you.



There should not be, a safe haven, or partial safe haven, where a player can not be harmed. His actions should have full repercussions, and he should be held liable for his actions if he is not capable of prevent them from happening to him.





That ship has sailed the moment CCP allowed proliferation of disposable alts.
ashley Eoner
#807 - 2014-09-12 01:58:59 UTC  |  Edited by: ashley Eoner
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
I've said this before, but I'll say it again.


EVE is a game about choice when it all comes down to it, its the main driving force of EVE. And your choices should have full effect on you.



There should not be, a safe haven, or partial safe haven, where a player can not be harmed. His actions should have full repercussions, and he should be held liable for his actions if he is not capable of prevent them from happening to him.


NPC corps give a massive amount of protection. Wardecs should be avoid not by dropping corp, but either by learning to play the game from a PVP aspect. or learning how to avoid them without dropping your corp. It isn't about E-honor, or anything like that.


Fundamentally dropping to a NPC removes choice and action from the game, and it shouldn't be allowed.


EDIT: I can also get behind what Steppa has suggested. A sort of social club rather than a real corp.
SO you want to remove the ability to dock in the game. While removing highsec completely so we end up with a worse version then nullsec. WEll have fun playing the game with 100 other people. Because no new players will stick around for that stupidity and the veterans will quit in droves. Then eve really would be dying.


Seems to me that you are more interested in killing eve as a game.


Or turning it into a call of duty in space.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#808 - 2014-09-12 02:01:08 UTC
ashley Eoner wrote:
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
I've said this before, but I'll say it again.


EVE is a game about choice when it all comes down to it, its the main driving force of EVE. And your choices should have full effect on you.



There should not be, a safe haven, or partial safe haven, where a player can not be harmed. His actions should have full repercussions, and he should be held liable for his actions if he is not capable of prevent them from happening to him.


NPC corps give a massive amount of protection. Wardecs should be avoid not by dropping corp, but either by learning to play the game from a PVP aspect. or learning how to avoid them without dropping your corp. It isn't about E-honor, or anything like that.


Fundamentally dropping to a NPC removes choice and action from the game, and it shouldn't be allowed.


EDIT: I can also get behind what Steppa has suggested. A sort of social club rather than a real corp.
SO you want to remove the ability to dock in the game. While removing highsec completely so we end up with a worse version then nullsec. WEll have fun playing the game with 100 other people. Because no new players will stick around for that stupidity and the veterans will quit in droves. Then eve really would be dying.


Seems to me that you are more interested in killing eve as a game.



That's not what he said, please don't strawman. You have not argued against a single point he just made except one you put in his mouth for him.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
ashley Eoner
#809 - 2014-09-12 02:06:39 UTC  |  Edited by: ashley Eoner
Remiel Pollard wrote:
ashley Eoner wrote:
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
I've said this before, but I'll say it again.


EVE is a game about choice when it all comes down to it, its the main driving force of EVE. And your choices should have full effect on you.



There should not be, a safe haven, or partial safe haven, where a player can not be harmed. His actions should have full repercussions, and he should be held liable for his actions if he is not capable of prevent them from happening to him.


NPC corps give a massive amount of protection. Wardecs should be avoid not by dropping corp, but either by learning to play the game from a PVP aspect. or learning how to avoid them without dropping your corp. It isn't about E-honor, or anything like that.


Fundamentally dropping to a NPC removes choice and action from the game, and it shouldn't be allowed.


EDIT: I can also get behind what Steppa has suggested. A sort of social club rather than a real corp.
SO you want to remove the ability to dock in the game. While removing highsec completely so we end up with a worse version then nullsec. WEll have fun playing the game with 100 other people. Because no new players will stick around for that stupidity and the veterans will quit in droves. Then eve really would be dying.


Seems to me that you are more interested in killing eve as a game.



That's not what he said, please don't strawman. You have not argued against a single point he just made except one you put in his mouth for him.

Bullshit he's arguing there should never be a safe place in eve. That clearly means space stations should either be removed or turned into an anchoring thing where you float in space but can change ships somehow.

Station traders are 100% safe otherwise. Everyone wanting to dodge a war are 100% safe otherwise. So thus it has to be removed according to him.

Quote:
There should not be, a safe haven, or partial safe haven, where a player can not be harmed.
Can you read? That is the only place where you cannot be harmed in eve. Anytime you undock you can be ganked or more.


Seriously never thought I'd see the day when the "elite pvpers" are so lazy and risk adverse they can't even choose their wardecs carefully or gank the ones that dodge.
Steppa Musana
Doomheim
#810 - 2014-09-12 02:19:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Steppa Musana
ashley Eoner wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
ashley Eoner wrote:
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
I've said this before, but I'll say it again.


EVE is a game about choice when it all comes down to it, its the main driving force of EVE. And your choices should have full effect on you.



There should not be, a safe haven, or partial safe haven, where a player can not be harmed. His actions should have full repercussions, and he should be held liable for his actions if he is not capable of prevent them from happening to him.


NPC corps give a massive amount of protection. Wardecs should be avoid not by dropping corp, but either by learning to play the game from a PVP aspect. or learning how to avoid them without dropping your corp. It isn't about E-honor, or anything like that.


Fundamentally dropping to a NPC removes choice and action from the game, and it shouldn't be allowed.


EDIT: I can also get behind what Steppa has suggested. A sort of social club rather than a real corp.
SO you want to remove the ability to dock in the game. While removing highsec completely so we end up with a worse version then nullsec. WEll have fun playing the game with 100 other people. Because no new players will stick around for that stupidity and the veterans will quit in droves. Then eve really would be dying.


Seems to me that you are more interested in killing eve as a game.



That's not what he said, please don't strawman. You have not argued against a single point he just made except one you put in his mouth for him.

Bullshit he's arguing there should never be a safe place in eve. That clearly means space stations should either be removed or turned into an anchoring thing where you float in space but can change ships somehow.

Station traders are 100% safe otherwise. Everyone wanting to dodge a war are 100% safe otherwise. So thus it has to be removed according to him.

Quote:
There should not be, a safe haven, or partial safe haven, where a player can not be harmed.
Can you read? That is the only place where you cannot be harmed in eve. Anytime you undock you can be ganked or more.


Seriously never thought I'd see the day when the "elite pvpers" are so lazy and risk adverse they can't even choose their wardecs carefully or gank the ones that dodge.

Great. Another actor from EVE-O's new television series, Game of Words.
Are you just making a cameo appearance or should we expect you to be a recurring character?

Safety in this regard is referencing safety in space. Don't be deliberately obtuse. Stations are 100% safe, everywhere, even in null. NPC corps are not, but they are in fact a safe haven to avoid all forms of non-suicide PVP.

Hey guys.
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
#811 - 2014-09-12 02:20:17 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Forming a Corp in eve is saying " yup, we are ready for you, bring it".
If ye can't hack the attention, go back to an npc Corp till ye find an established player Corp that either is willing to defend themselves or knows how to evade a war.

Have ye tried fighting back?

Wow, I love these posts.

Did you try fighting back? You did read that they are a bunch of newbies being harassed by a veteran corp who seems to get off hunting newbs (surprise, surprise). Fighting back is exactly what the other corp wants, because the result is inevitable and then they don't have to look for the other guy. Lambs to the fodder.

So maybe hire a bigger bully? This is how that goes. Once you pay your protector you are now in the same position with an ally. You are not in control and must heed the demands of your so-called protector.

Hire mercs? A quick search of the forums will reveal how that goes.

Join an alliance. But who will be your allies? Most likely other newbs so now they are licking their lips because you have hand delivered more targets . You might as well call your alliance "Kill Mail".

The best way to deal with bullies....provide no resistance. Disband and they will bore and find other targets. Become nomads until you find a place in EvE with no bullies. Oh wait....

CCP sanctions on-line bullying. Once you accept that you will find your own way to live with it.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#812 - 2014-09-12 02:23:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
ashley Eoner wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
ashley Eoner wrote:
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
I've said this before, but I'll say it again.


EVE is a game about choice when it all comes down to it, its the main driving force of EVE. And your choices should have full effect on you.



There should not be, a safe haven, or partial safe haven, where a player can not be harmed. His actions should have full repercussions, and he should be held liable for his actions if he is not capable of prevent them from happening to him.


NPC corps give a massive amount of protection. Wardecs should be avoid not by dropping corp, but either by learning to play the game from a PVP aspect. or learning how to avoid them without dropping your corp. It isn't about E-honor, or anything like that.


Fundamentally dropping to a NPC removes choice and action from the game, and it shouldn't be allowed.


EDIT: I can also get behind what Steppa has suggested. A sort of social club rather than a real corp.
SO you want to remove the ability to dock in the game. While removing highsec completely so we end up with a worse version then nullsec. WEll have fun playing the game with 100 other people. Because no new players will stick around for that stupidity and the veterans will quit in droves. Then eve really would be dying.


Seems to me that you are more interested in killing eve as a game.



That's not what he said, please don't strawman. You have not argued against a single point he just made except one you put in his mouth for him.

Bullshit he's arguing there should never be a safe place in eve. That clearly means space stations should either be removed or turned into an anchoring thing where you float in space but can change ships somehow.

Station traders are 100% safe otherwise. Everyone wanting to dodge a war are 100% safe otherwise. So thus it has to be removed according to him.

Quote:
There should not be, a safe haven, or partial safe haven, where a player can not be harmed.
Can you read? That is the only place where you cannot be harmed in eve. Anytime you undock you can be ganked or more.


Seriously never thought I'd see the day when the "elite pvpers" are so lazy and risk adverse they can't even choose their wardecs carefully or gank the ones that dodge.


I can read just fine.

You're completely twisting his meaning in order to manufacture a critique against his argument. You still haven't offered one against his ACTUAL argument though. You're shifting the goalposts, so to speak.

If everyone has to say "there should be no safe place in space in New Eden" every time they explain what he's explained, just for the sake of a few pedantic pants-on-head plankards like you, then we might as well not even bother explaining, just troll you and call you names.

You are not the rhetorician you think you are, though. This thread has never been about stations, and a half-clever rhetorician would have known to keep with the context while simultaneously making the context irrelevant. You've failed to do that, you just went straight for the, "You argued A therefore you're also arguing B which makes you wrong" and honestly, I've seen better arguments from William Lane Craig.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
ashley Eoner
#813 - 2014-09-12 02:25:03 UTC  |  Edited by: ashley Eoner
Remiel Pollard wrote:
I can read just fine.

You're completely twisting his meaning in order to manufacture a critique against his argument. You still haven't offered one against his ACTUAL argument though.

If everyone has to say "there should be no safe place in space in New Eden" every time they explain what he's explained, just for the sake of a few pedantic pants-on-head plankards like you, then we might as well not even bother explaining, just troll you and call you names.

You are not the rhetorician you think you are, though. This thread has never been about stations, and a half-clever rhetorician would have known to keep with the context while simultaneously making the context irrelevant. You've failed to do that, you just went straight for the, "You argued A therefore you're also arguing B which makes you wrong" and honestly, I've seen better arguments from William Lane Craig.
So taking him at his word is twisting the meaning of his words?? How does that even remotely work? Would you like to tell me what safe spot he could of been talking about? The only safe spot that exists is in stations..

You're just mad because you didn't realize you were supporting a dumb idea and now you have to weasel out.
Steppa Musana
Doomheim
#814 - 2014-09-12 02:31:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Steppa Musana
Nexus Day wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Forming a Corp in eve is saying " yup, we are ready for you, bring it".
If ye can't hack the attention, go back to an npc Corp till ye find an established player Corp that either is willing to defend themselves or knows how to evade a war.

Have ye tried fighting back?

Wow, I love these posts.

Did you try fighting back? You did read that they are a bunch of newbies being harassed by a veteran corp who seems to get off hunting newbs (surprise, surprise). Fighting back is exactly what the other corp wants, because the result is inevitable and then they don't have to look for the other guy. Lambs to the fodder.

So maybe hire a bigger bully? This is how that goes. Once you pay your protector you are now in the same position with an ally. You are not in control and must heed the demands of your so-called protector.

Hire mercs? A quick search of the forums will reveal how that goes.

Join an alliance. But who will be your allies? Most likely other newbs so now they are licking their lips because you have hand delivered more targets . You might as well call your alliance "Kill Mail".

The best way to deal with bullies....provide no resistance. Disband and they will bore and find other targets. Become nomads until you find a place in EvE with no bullies. Oh wait....

CCP sanctions on-line bullying. Once you accept that you will find your own way to live with it.

You don't have to fight back. You can frustrate them while staying in corp. The best way to do this is to go on roams in low-sec. Take some cheap frigs and have some fun. They will be bothered by the fact that you are PVPing, just not with them. It's a slap to the face.

If not, try cloaking up in space. Sit in silence. Bore them into not wardeccing you.

You can also try out other parts of space. You can go weeks sometimes ratting or mining in WH or rental null without being bothered.

Lastly, you can hire protection, contrary to what you're saying. I've seen mining corps do this to great affect. The mercs even enticed them to join in on the fun, which they did, and seemed to thoroughly enjoy themselves.

There are options. If they are unacceptable, that is a choice to be made, but that choice should have repercussions.

Hey guys.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#815 - 2014-09-12 02:32:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
ashley Eoner wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
I can read just fine.

You're completely twisting his meaning in order to manufacture a critique against his argument. You still haven't offered one against his ACTUAL argument though.

If everyone has to say "there should be no safe place in space in New Eden" every time they explain what he's explained, just for the sake of a few pedantic pants-on-head plankards like you, then we might as well not even bother explaining, just troll you and call you names.

You are not the rhetorician you think you are, though. This thread has never been about stations, and a half-clever rhetorician would have known to keep with the context while simultaneously making the context irrelevant. You've failed to do that, you just went straight for the, "You argued A therefore you're also arguing B which makes you wrong" and honestly, I've seen better arguments from William Lane Craig.
So taking him at his word is twisting the meaning of his words?? How does that even remotely work? Would you like to tell me what safe spot he could of been talking about? The only safe spot that exists is in stations..

You're just mad because you didn't realize you were supporting a dumb idea and now you have to weasel out.


That's not what you did though. You put words in his mouth.

Please quote the post where he said, "stations should be removed from the game". You're talking to someone who's had knocks on the door from Scientologist lawyers by the way so, rhetoric is just something that comes naturally now. You're going to have to pick up your game, it's really quite terribad.

But, since I know you're not gonna drop it and keep pushing this to its limits, I do feel the need to remind you that just being docked up is not safe at all.

Now, take your failure and own it. OWN IT!!!!

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
ashley Eoner
#816 - 2014-09-12 02:34:28 UTC  |  Edited by: ashley Eoner
Remiel Pollard wrote:
ashley Eoner wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
I can read just fine.

You're completely twisting his meaning in order to manufacture a critique against his argument. You still haven't offered one against his ACTUAL argument though.

If everyone has to say "there should be no safe place in space in New Eden" every time they explain what he's explained, just for the sake of a few pedantic pants-on-head plankards like you, then we might as well not even bother explaining, just troll you and call you names.

You are not the rhetorician you think you are, though. This thread has never been about stations, and a half-clever rhetorician would have known to keep with the context while simultaneously making the context irrelevant. You've failed to do that, you just went straight for the, "You argued A therefore you're also arguing B which makes you wrong" and honestly, I've seen better arguments from William Lane Craig.
So taking him at his word is twisting the meaning of his words?? How does that even remotely work? Would you like to tell me what safe spot he could of been talking about? The only safe spot that exists is in stations..

You're just mad because you didn't realize you were supporting a dumb idea and now you have to weasel out.


That's not what you did though. You put words in his mouth.

Please quote the post where he said, "stations should be removed from the game". You're talking to someone who's had knocks on the door from Scientologist lawyers by the way so, rhetoric is just something that comes naturally now. You're going to have to pick up your game, it's really quite terribad.
I QUOTED HIM. Acknowledging what they said is not putting words in their mouth. Quoting what they said is not putting words in their mouth. His ideas were stupid and you're mad because I pointed out how dumb they were.


What other safe spots are there in eve? There is no place in eve that you are safe other then in a station. Deal with the reality of what he's demanding then come back and have a discussion.

Frankly in my view the fellow is asking for call of duty in space not eve. Maybe he's playing the wrong game.


For god's sake the fellow claims that NPC corps "give massive amounts of protection" when in reality the only protection it gives is against getting wardecced. Guess what? I get the same level of protection out of a one man corp while not having any of the negatives of the NPC corp. I've had one wardec on one of my one man corps and if I couldn't drop the corp I would of just docked the alt for the time. Meanwhile a newbie in this fellow's world would be totally boned.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#817 - 2014-09-12 02:35:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
ashley Eoner wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
ashley Eoner wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
I can read just fine.

You're completely twisting his meaning in order to manufacture a critique against his argument. You still haven't offered one against his ACTUAL argument though.

If everyone has to say "there should be no safe place in space in New Eden" every time they explain what he's explained, just for the sake of a few pedantic pants-on-head plankards like you, then we might as well not even bother explaining, just troll you and call you names.

You are not the rhetorician you think you are, though. This thread has never been about stations, and a half-clever rhetorician would have known to keep with the context while simultaneously making the context irrelevant. You've failed to do that, you just went straight for the, "You argued A therefore you're also arguing B which makes you wrong" and honestly, I've seen better arguments from William Lane Craig.
So taking him at his word is twisting the meaning of his words?? How does that even remotely work? Would you like to tell me what safe spot he could of been talking about? The only safe spot that exists is in stations..

You're just mad because you didn't realize you were supporting a dumb idea and now you have to weasel out.


That's not what you did though. You put words in his mouth.

Please quote the post where he said, "stations should be removed from the game". You're talking to someone who's had knocks on the door from Scientologist lawyers by the way so, rhetoric is just something that comes naturally now. You're going to have to pick up your game, it's really quite terribad.
I QUOTED HIM. Acknowledging what they said is not putting words in their mouth. Quoting what they said is not putting words in their mouth. His ideas were stupid and you're mad because I pointed out how dumb they were.


What other safe spots are there in eve? There is no place in eve that you are safe other then in a station. Deal with the reality of what he's demanding then come back and have a discussion.

Frankly in my view the fellow is asking for call of duty in space not eve. Maybe he's playing the wrong game.


I've edited my post now. And no, you didn't quote him saying "stations should be removed" at all. That never happened.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
ashley Eoner
#818 - 2014-09-12 02:38:48 UTC  |  Edited by: ashley Eoner
Remiel Pollard. And no, you didn't quote him saying "stations should be removed" at all. That never happened.[/quote wrote:


So are you going to claim that stations aren't a "safe haven" protecting you from harm?


[quote]There should not be, a safe haven, or partial safe haven, where a player can not be harmed.

What else other then stations are a safe haven protecting a player from harm?

EDIT: SO now you're changing your claim to that the fellow is completely clueless?


Because someone station traded? Aka engaged in an activity that is akin to undocking?
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#819 - 2014-09-12 02:39:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
ashley Eoner wrote:


So are you going to claim that stations aren't a "safe haven" protecting you from harm?




Okay, since you aren't reading the post I edited, or just ignoring it, I'll link this again. No, being docked in stations is not safe.

Now run along and stop being a twit.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
ashley Eoner
#820 - 2014-09-12 02:47:03 UTC  |  Edited by: ashley Eoner
Remiel Pollard wrote:
ashley Eoner wrote:


So are you going to claim that stations aren't a "safe haven" protecting you from harm?




Okay, since you aren't reading the post I edited, or just ignoring it, I'll link this again. No, being docked in stations is not safe.

Now run along and stop being a twit.

Being docked not engaging in others is perfectly safe. Nothing in that video shows a person docked up avoiding contact with others. I did see a lot of non consensual "pvp" in another video though which re-enforces my point that highsec isn't safe and that being in a NPC corp doesn't provide a "massive amount of protection".



EDIT : Ah yes the insult the last resort of the disarmed.