No, why? The official game mechanic is that you get Faction Police aggro. But that’s not always true, as we can see. What CCP says about it isn’t relevant, anyone here can read.
So, what the developers and creators of the game says isn’t relevant? I’d say that’s the end of the thread right there…
2 Likes
No, it actually does. Their game, their decision. Absolutely nothing else matters. Not your opinion, not my opinion, nothing.
The official game mechanic is that you can avoid Faction Police. Has been that way since the beginning even though other mechanics around them have changed.
This entire thread is nothing more than you complaining that someone is playing the game in a manner you do not approve of. Do kindly get over yourself.
2 Likes
This has nothing to do with what you personally would like. There are official game mechanics and if these are visibly circumvented, then that is an exploit. What CCP says about it is no longer relevant, everyone has eyes in their head and can read. 
I would be interested to know whether players would argue the same way if a Titan in Jita suddenly detonates a Doomsday in front of the station. Well, that is not an exploit if you can do it…
No, deception is legally relevant and that is exactly where we are, even more so if it is actually intended that way and not just an exploit.
LIke I said earlier, the Faction Police are not there to keep you safe. They are there to harass opposing faction players and those with low sec status. It’s been this way for 20 years.
Yet the entire purpose of this thread is what you would personally like.
And we have repeatedly told you there are no mechanics being curcumvented. You’re just deciding it should be the way you personally would like, and so you decided it’s being curcumvented.
How is the fact that it’s their game difficult for you to comprehend?
You cannot take a Titan into highsec, nor even manufacture them there, so yes, that would be an exploit.
The f*ck is this supposed to mean? You’re threatening CCP with legal action now because you don’t like how someone was playing a game?
1 Like
But that’s not what it’s about. It’s about clearly defining game mechanics, otherwise it’s fraud and I’d like my money back.
If that was the case, then I would have been sued a thousand times over the years from keeping players perma-bumped before that was changed. 
Do show us anywhere where you were promised in writing that Faction Police would be there to protect you.
F*cking fraud? That’s the bullsh!t you’re going with now? Get real.
1 Like
Your argument has been refuted even back in 2015:
Source: https://forums-archive.eveonline.com/message/5964577/#post5964577
2 Likes
CCP has a list of known and declared exploits..
While it isn’t an exhaustive list, if the ‘exploit’ you mention is not on that list, it’s either not a well known exploit yet or not declared as such so that people won’t abuse it.
As faction police avoidance has been going on for over a decade I seriously doubt it’s not known to CCP and also not a hidden trick either.
CCP went out of their way to declare CONCORD avoidance an exploit, but didn’t do anything about faction police.
To me this shows that CCP does not think that avoidance of faction police is an exploit in their book.
1 Like
It’s very simple and just because you don’t want to understand it doesn’t change anything. It’s about clarifying the game mechanics and a grey area is being deliberately maintained here. It’s not about how you do it, it’s about misrepresenting the facts. Then CCP should make a clear statement on this: There are ways to override the faction police for a system. That’s legitimate and that’s it.
It’s also not about the faction police protecting players. If you can tank the faction police, then that’s a whole different story.
The faction police should spawn, but don’t always do so for whatever reason. That’s what it’s about and has nothing to do with anything else.
Oh “teh” irony. 
As suggested already even in that 2015 post I’ve cited in the form of a screenshot and with source link:
If you think it is an exploit (and want a clear statement about it from CCP) then just post a support ticket and ask the GMs and they will help you out. 
It’s really that simple. 
Edit:
As far as I understand the method, they spawn, but are kept occupied.
Maybe take your own advice here.
CCP is constantly modifying the list of known exploits, it’s not a static list.
Just because the facts don’t align with your opinion doesn’t make them misrepresented. They are just the facts.
They have, by not labeling it an exploit. Do they need to explain every mechanic and trick to you?
Evasion is as valid a tactic as a shield. Again, you not liking it is utterly irrelevant.
Just like you can manipulate CONCORD you can manipulate FacPo. There’s only a certain number of FacPo entities in any system, and they will jump to the next to assist if FacPo there are having a hard time. Using this to your benefit is no more an exploit than pre-spawning CONCORD where you want them for your benefit. It’s just a mechanic you don’t understand, so you want it banned instead of trying to understand it.
Yes, spawn on grid. Well, I don’t mean that ironically, it hasn’t happened to me yet.
I’m more interested in the fact that game developers can’t just do whatever they want because online games are virtual living spaces for the public in the 21st century.
They spawn on grid elsewhere where they are triggered then are kept occupied by combat on that grid while the character camping Jita 4-4 warps to the trade hub station grid and does its stuff while other character(s) keep the police spawns occupied at the other grid.
Dude, have you read the TOS and EULA?
They can do just that, and your only recourse is to quit playing if you don’t like it.
I don’t know who told you this bullsh!t, but I don’t know what’s funnier. The lie itself, or the fact you believe it.
2 Likes
Is he trying to say that real-life laws apply to a game environment or something? 
He’s been saying that for a few posts now, yeah.