i think thats a thing where opinions might split...
for example it wouldnt be that honourable if a top10 player can honourably attack a top500 player just because that top500 player successfuly attacked the top10 player

i personaly think, thats a situation where you as top10 just have to accept that if you attack that top500 player, it will be unhonourably for you.

I'm sorry for the necrobump, but I wanted to add some comment here.

In case of an attack, the attacker might profit 75% raid when the target is honoerable. This is a good way to stimulate the attack of honourable targets. But when I am honourable for one, why is that same person not honourable for me? It is not that the ammount of points make the difference. I can not honoroubly attack the number 2 in my universe (I am at 143).
Then the difference must be in the ammount of fleet (militairy points). Someyhing about + or - 100 places around you would be honourable (this is from my head, so might not be exactly right). Now someone attacks me and profits 75% raid. I want to take it back and I find myself raiding only 50% and also suffer negative honour points ( I am ammong view who seem to care for that), so the attacker has too much advantage. In this example even the number 2 can attack me (perhaps honourably) and I can not take my recources back with honour.

I suggested this idea after I had been raided by a person near my ranking. As he raided me honourably, I should be able to honourably reraid the player. This is not the case, so I figured there must be a reason in the complex calculation for making someone honourable or not. Since there is an outlaw status for players in noob protection that want to attack players that are out of their league, I figured this mode could be scaled down to make a player a honourable target for the player he/she just attacked.
Yes, there might be this problem where top 10 players could honourably attack top 500 players, but the top 10 players seem to hardly care for honour or dishonour (something that should also be worked on). Still, I thought that players would be honourable to each other and not player A is honourable for player B, but not the other way arround.

I hope I could make the problem a little clearer and I also hope the example given by Toxicterror is not seen as the point why this is suggested. That is more like the worst case scenario.