| NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? |
Tue, 10 February 2009 02:29  |
|
|
|
I have been asked by two different players whether you must tell anyone when you want to end a NAP.
NAPs, including the automatic starting ones, are individual agreements.
When you wish to activate the exit clause of a NAP you must tell the player in question otherwise an attack would be considered a backstab (& for those of you who are new that is considered to be very bad form & can even follow you in later games). There is no need to tell any player other than the one you wish to activate the exit clause with.
If you activate the exit clause via an ingame message then it is effective beginning the year after you write the message since the player in question would not get the message until then but if done via email the exit period can start immediately.
When Can You Attack Once The Exit Clause Is Activated (this is repeated from the game post)
The exit clause will be 2 years (When a race activates their exit clause first battles can be in 3rd year: eg. exit clause activated in 2440, NAP continues until 2442 when ship orders can be set to attack but battles occur in 2443).
[Updated on: Tue, 10 February 2009 16:36] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? |
Wed, 11 February 2009 08:09  |
|
 Sully |
 | Crewman 1st Class |
Messages: 39
Registered: January 2004 | |
|
Maybe we should only allow an exit clause to be valid if delivered using an in-game message.
This way everyone gets the same amount of time before war breaks out.
Also: I don't exactly have everyones email address.
Some players may be reluctant to hand over their email address knowing that it could cost them a year to propare for war.
[Updated on: Wed, 11 February 2009 08:12] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? |
Wed, 11 February 2009 20:43 |
|
|
|
| craebild wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 13:28 |
I would say the exit clause should be by in-game message only. That way everyone receives the same amount of warning, and if there later is doubt as to whether the exit clause was activated on time, then AlexTheGreat can check in the backed-up turn file.
|
Good thinking. You too Sully & Airny.
Activation of a NAP exit clause must, as of now, be by in-game message. Procedure:
1. In-game message sent in year y.
2. Recipient reads message in year y+1. Exit period begins.
3. Last year of exit period is y+3. Ships orders can be set to attack but no battles occur this year.
4. First battles, if any, occur in year y+4.
Edit: Spelling
[Updated on: Wed, 11 February 2009 20:43] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? |
Thu, 12 February 2009 16:55 |
|
|
|
And a few more questions:
1) A drop of colonists on another player's planet is considered an attack, correct?
2) Other than being publicly ostracized, are there any other penalties for breaking the NAP rule? (Like not being allowed to have any other players set to Friend for 10 years...)
Raindancer
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? |
Fri, 13 February 2009 06:08 |
|
|
|
| Raindancer wrote on Thu, 12 February 2009 16:55 |
And a few more questions:
1) A drop of colonists on another player's planet is considered an attack, correct?
2) Other than being publicly ostracized, are there any other penalties for breaking the NAP rule? (Like not being allowed to have any other players set to Friend for 10 years...)
Raindancer
|
A pop-drop is most definately an attack.
No, these NAPs work just like any other. If you break one then it is a backstab with all the consequences.
Since the news of a backstab gets around I suggest that you don't do it. You're risking your rep, not only in this game, but in future ones. A player is a lot less likely to ally with someone if they know they have backstabbed someone in any game (except in 2nd Diadochi War where there is a special rule that can actually require it).
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? |
Fri, 13 February 2009 09:56 |
|
|
|
| AlexTheGreat wrote on Fri, 13 February 2009 06:08 |
| Raindancer wrote on Thu, 12 February 2009 16:55 |
2) Other than being publicly ostracized, are there any other penalties for breaking the NAP rule? (Like not being allowed to have any other players set to Friend for 10 years...)
|
No, these NAPs work just like any other. If you break one then it is a backstab with all the consequences.
Since the news of a backstab gets around I suggest that you don't do it. You're risking your rep, not only in this game, but in future ones. A player is a lot less likely to ally with someone if they know they have backstabbed someone in any game
|
My opinion: if there are no in-game consequences to breaking the NAP then it is a suggestion, not a rule.
Magic9mushroom's idea of getting banned from the game is a bit severe, but highly effective. Personally I like it.
Not being allowed to submit a few turns, not being allowed to have allies for a period, those are also real in-game consequences for breaking a rule.
I think breaking the NAP should be a rule, not a suggestion, and that there should be SOME in-game consequences for breaking that rule.
Yes, backstabbing could hurt a reputation, but unless there is some penalty actually enforced by the host, then it will forever be debated whether or not it was a backstab and/or breaking the rules. Then the victim could get a bad reputation for accusing someone and continuing to argue about it. Of course, someone like me who never reads the end-game banter from other games, may never hear about it anyway. i.e. I do not know anyone in this game, so I have no idea if any of the players here break agreements. I would guess not, or they would not have joined a game like this to begin with.
Other opinions?
RuleDancer
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? |
Fri, 13 February 2009 20:15 |
|
|
|
Rule With Penalty For A Backstab?
I would like further feedback from you on this.
After some consideration I'm leaning towards making it a rule with maybe the requirement that all other races be set to "enemy" for the rest of the game + an announcement to all other players that it has happened.
Also, if there is to be a penalty, should it apply to other NAPs - i.e. renegotiated ones. Note that such a penalty would definately not apply to other agreements such as a border agreement, MDA and would also not apply to a full alliance (races that are mutually set to Friend or where there is a current agreement in writing saying that the races are supposed to be allied).
It's always a bad idea to introduce new rules once a game has started so I will make this decision before this gen is out. It is VERY UNLIKELY that I would consider any other change.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? |
Fri, 13 February 2009 22:56 |
|
| magic9mushroom |
 | Commander |
Messages: 1369
Registered: May 2008 | |
|
| AlexTheGreat wrote on Sat, 14 February 2009 12:15 |
Rule With Penalty For A Backstab?
I would like further feedback from you on this.
After some consideration I'm leaning towards making it a rule with maybe the requirement that all other races be set to "enemy" for the rest of the game + an announcement to all other players that it has happened.
Also, if there is to be a penalty, should it apply to other NAPs - i.e. renegotiated ones. Note that such a penalty would definately not apply to other agreements such as a border agreement, MDA and would also not apply to a full alliance (races that are mutually set to Friend or where there is a current agreement in writing saying that the races are supposed to be allied).
It's always a bad idea to introduce new rules once a game has started so I will make this decision before this gen is out. It is VERY UNLIKELY that I would consider any other change.
|
Well, the impression I got and I think a few others got is that you simply aren't allowed to break the starting NAPs. After all, they were put in in response to a request for there to be adequate warning before any war. Therefore I'd think that it wouldn't be changing anything at all to state that you get banned if you break the starting NAPs (NOT any other later NAPs, though).
Remember, you did list it in the same category as the "max alliance size 3" rule, which I presume does carry some sort of penalty from the host.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? |
Mon, 16 February 2009 02:01 |
|
|
|
That looks like all the feedback I'll get so it's decision time which is:
If anyone breaks an initial current NAP there will be a diplomatic penalty.
1. All players in the game will be informed.
2. The perpetrator must have a status of "Enemy" with all other players for the rest of the game.
3. All other players must set a status of "Enemy" with the perpetrator for the rest of the game.
IOW he is ostrecised.
This does not apply to negotiated/renegotiated NAP agreements & other types of agreements. If someone breaks such an agreement then the backstab would be no different to one in any other game.
[Updated on: Mon, 16 February 2009 02:03] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? |
Mon, 16 February 2009 06:33 |
|
|
|
| neilhoward wrote on Mon, 16 February 2009 02:39 |
1
We don't need to add or change the rules after the game starts.
|
In principle, I agree. I hate to do it but enough players wanted a change to matter & noone (including you) opposed it when I introduced the subject.
I've never changed a rule after a game started before & am unlikely to do it again. In this case it's early enough that it doesn't matter a lot.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? |
Mon, 16 February 2009 23:04 |
|
| magic9mushroom |
| Commander |
Messages: 1369
Registered: May 2008 | |
|
| AlexTheGreat wrote on Mon, 16 February 2009 22:33 |
| neilhoward wrote on Mon, 16 February 2009 02:39 |
1
We don't need to add or change the rules after the game starts.
|
In principle, I agree. I hate to do it but enough players wanted a change to matter & noone (including you) opposed it when I introduced the subject.
I've never changed a rule after a game started before & am unlikely to do it again. In this case it's early enough that it doesn't matter a lot.
|
It's not changing the rules, as I've already said. It's clarifying a rule.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
