Player-versus-Player (PvP) games do not have to be balanced. By "balanced" I narrowly speak to the perspective and interaction of a small number of individuals or groups of players. If they are not balanced they can instead provide venues to allow players to engage indirectly and level the playing field. In stone-paper-scissors stone bests scissors but paper sneaks up, so scissors says to paper "Dude - let's be allies?"
Another misconception might be this. If *multiplayer* PvP games require more skill than PvE (Player-versus-Environment) games, then it must follow it is about twitch (eye-hand coordination). This might be more true for arena games (though not entirely - as teamwork can count). It is less true for MMOGs where large numbers of players and their apparent need for outcomes to be independent of network latency has meant that when two parties hit the "WHACK YOU" button, all things being equal, the outcome is designed to be largely out of your control.
Choices that come before and after hitting the "WHACK YOU" button provide whatever skill differentiator there is.
Eve-Online is a complicated place. The previous posts in this series sugggest this (NBSI and the grey problem, Scarcely rare, My friend’s keeper, The moon is a harsh mistress). However, what may not be apparent to most readers is that with Eve-Online's complexity comes opportunity for asymmetric exploits that can convert unbalanced relationships into more balanced ones. And it seems to me that such are critical in making the game world seem fair.