Weed: "more combat" adds neither depth nor complexity, just more combat.

For more depth, there would be alternative methods- political, economic- of hurting your foe.

For more complexity, you would have to make additional considerations before opening fire on someone: how would it affect your credit rating/alliance/income/relations?

Red's idea of a third zone is a great idea. For that matter, so is PvP on Alpha if real risks are introduced.

Could someone please explain to me how, in a game with unlimited resources, free bots, and free cash, there is "risk" in PvP?

You might wish to re read that post, as it was Other who used the STFU, not I... My response was the Provoke Failed perhaps you need more EP in that extension?. ^^

Next, that past history I refer to is the experience over years of various designs and their various degrees of failure to prevent ganking and/or griefing.  The other variable is the open ended time commitment on the part of the Dev's that many such systems required. In some cases they just threw up their hands and let nature take its course(not a good course for many games these days).  Over all, only a server side flag has been shown to prevent ganking/griefing. PvP Yes, or PvP No.  Its the gray areas that shade off into the "possibilities" some are so fond of that are VERY difficult to get even close to right.  Not to mention the continued time commitment required to deal with them.
No matter how clever people consider themselves to be with these systems, it almost always turns out that even more clever people find ways around them. Then the Dev's end up spending time patching that, and the next and the next... There is a clear pattern here.
No one said that mining, hauling would stop completely. No doubt some would continue. But at this point in the game, I suspect that many would simply leave. There are many, MANY options for players these days.  Losing players at this point of the game is NOT what we want.  Yes, yes I know that some have already left because they didn't have sufficient "options, challenge, risk"... But do we really want to make matters worse at this point?

"Constant personal attacks towards individuals"? Thats a rather broad generalization. Is that in some recent posts, or all posts? Are you perhaps refering to my teasing Other about his attempt to provoke me? That was a rather measured response on my part(and clearly indicated to have been made with humor).

As for assumptions, I'm as guilty of those as anyone. Also of using past history as a guide to the future. But that is what we humans tend to do, as we go about our daily lives.

So, all levels of player competition are, or should be equal? The ability to gank miners and haulers, should be allowed, because of competition in the market sector of the game?  Do you really consider the two examples to be equal?

You answered your own question in regards to non consenural attacks. In the market competition, all parties consent to take part(by virtue of being in the market). In the PvP area, unless the player is on the Beta island, they have not consented to take part in PvP.

As the rule set stands now, there is something for everyone. If one wants to mine, haul, PvE then stay on the Alpha Islands. If one wants to PvP, then stay on the Beta Islands. Thus everyone gets what they want(except for a small percentage, but then making them happy, makes MANY others unhappy).

"Creating"?? The game is *already* two separate games.  You have the miners and haulers, and PvE types on Alpha, and the PvP and ganker types on Beta.  Thats all the "balance" we need in actual fact.  The game can be evolved rather well along those dynamics, and the story line I've out lined would back stop that rather well.   All of this nonsense about "options, and risk, and challenge" is just code for wanting to be able to gank miners and haulers, and ruin other players experience.  I find it difficult in the extreme to believe that some of you aren't aware of this, and its implications.

Attempt at provoke failed... Perhaps you need more EP in that extension? <grin>

Other, lets be realistic here, and look at not only past history, but the dynamics involved, shall we?  What at its most fundamental, is the natural CONSEQUENCE of allowing these changes in the rule set that some of you are advocating? Miners and haulers get ganked, and PvE types have to deal with PvP types, when they clearly do not wish to(other wise they'd be over on Beta).  One doesn't have to look very far (that history thing...) to realize what the very possible motivations involved are.  Now shall we continue this discussion in a more civil fashion, or are you going to waste more EP in that extension? ^^

Ah, the sacred "sand box"... Have you ever seen what happens in the typical "sandbox"?  Not only do the Dev's end up having to protect their business model(think about the evolution of Concord in EVE), but they have to waste valuable time(and believe me they never have enough of that resource) on dealing with the on going antics of the gankers and griefers.

Why? Because such types make up a SMALL percentage of the player base, and they tend to drive off many other types of players unless checked. Thats NOT good for the companies bottom line. Make no mistake about it, in todays gaming market, the closer a game is to a "sandbox", the more narrowly it niches itself. Thus limiting the profits to be made, and also the expansion possibilities. In a very real sense, such games become self limiting to the extent that they stay "sandboxes".  Is that what we want for Perpetuum?

Exactly. We are not asking to inflict our play style on the PvP types I might note(they are more than welcome to Beta). To the contrary, they are the ones advocating inflicting their play style on us. Not to mention that some fly off the handle when one mentions the obvious motivations of some. ^^

First in the market sense, you are not out NIC, because you still have what ever it is you wished to sell.  If you can't compete with that item, then try something else.  If its time you are worried about wasting, you are in the wrong hobby. MMO's are infamous for costing a LOT of time to take part in. ^^

Adding the ability to attack people farming a given spawn, would have no doubt interesting consequences... Such as larger and larger numbers of people at the spawn site(ganking anyone who comes near). That may sound like "heaven" to certain types, but believe me, it gets OLD fast. Not to mention the spill over to miners and haulers. Making it possible to ruin others play experience, doesn't make good business sense, nor is it necessary.

This is not flying off the handle?
Other:
"You suspect my motivations?  I suspect your motivations.  I think you just want a futuristic version of WoW.  Maybe you're a Chinese NIC farmer building up your reserves so that you can sell it through third party websites full of malicious software.
Try to make an intelligent argument instead of casting aspersions or STFU and let the adults talk.
kthxbye"
It certainly has all of the ear marks of such... Including the final kthxbye, and STFU...<face palm> ^^
Notice my remarks have always been general(not directed at anyone in particular), and include "suspect" or some such. You took yours personal. Notice the difference?

So, if I spend 50,000 EP on combat extensions, and 5000 EP on industry and harvesting, I'm not combat specialized? If you really believe this, you're splitting hairs.

Yes, I advocate this for high-level gear, but not basic items.

At no time did I ever write this.

This is called reductio ad absurdem, and a really poor move on your part. I never wrote such a thing, and you look like a fool for claiming it

Exactly like the real world, isn't it? If you specialize, then you can go much further in your chosen field. If you don't specialize, you can do many more things, but none of them as well as a specialist.
Now, please try rereading, and notice I make two points:

1. Half of this is already in-game: industrialist are unable to use the gear necessary to farm high-level NPCs.

2. because only half of this is already in game, combat specialists do not have to rely in any way on industrialists: yes, having them around is very convenient, but never necessary.

3. On the other hand, industrialist characters must rely on combat specialists to provide high-level kernels and items, because they cannot gather them.

I never said they did: please reread. What I wrote was that adding PvP to the Alphas will not solve the problem of spawn camping.

But even then, let's face it: there's a large portion of the 15-25 year-old crowd whose definition of fun is to ruin the game for others, so even if it costs them, they'll continue to do it. There will always be more gankers than vigilantes.

Nice try, but no. Or did you forget that they get free robots? If you have 80K EP in combat extensions, it doesn't matter if you're in an Arkhe or a mech: you'll have no trouble camping spawns.

I think you need to look up "force"- people are already playing this way, but there's an imbalance between combat and non-combat characters. I'm only suggesting that the rewards be commensurate.