Home World Forum
Stars! AutoHost web forums

Jump to Stars! AutoHost


 
 
Home » Old Game Forums » All Quiet » NAP: Who must you tell when ending it?
NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? Tue, 10 February 2009 02:29 Go to next message
AlexTheGreat is currently offline AlexTheGreat

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 661
Registered: May 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
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 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sully is currently offline 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 10:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Airny is currently offline Airny

 
Crewman 1st Class

Messages: 33
Registered: June 2008
Location: Germany
Sully wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 14:09

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.

I totally agree with this.
Sully wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 14:09


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.

We shouldn't be forced to publish our email adresses and must not have anything to do with exit clauses. There is a Private Messaging system in this forum which I'd prefer to use, so why not use it?

Report message to a moderator

Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? Wed, 11 February 2009 13:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
craebild is currently offline craebild

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 568
Registered: December 2003
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
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.


Med venlig hilsen / Best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Christian Ræbild / Christian Raebild

Report message to a moderator

Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? Wed, 11 February 2009 20:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
AlexTheGreat is currently offline AlexTheGreat

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 661
Registered: May 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
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 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Raindancer is currently offline Raindancer

 
Officer Cadet 2nd Year

Messages: 240
Registered: February 2003
Location: Finger Lakes NY, USA

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? Thu, 12 February 2009 20:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
magic9mushroom is currently offline magic9mushroom

 
Commander

Messages: 1282
Registered: May 2008
AFAIK, you're not allowed to break the NAP rule. IE, you get banned if you do.

Report message to a moderator

Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? Fri, 13 February 2009 06:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
AlexTheGreat is currently offline AlexTheGreat

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 661
Registered: May 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
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 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Raindancer is currently offline Raindancer

 
Officer Cadet 2nd Year

Messages: 240
Registered: February 2003
Location: Finger Lakes NY, USA

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 11:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eagle of Fire

 
Lt. Commander

Messages: 809
Registered: December 2008
Location: GMT -5
My opinion on all this is that the AllQuiet game was designed specifically for us to start with a 2 years exit clause NAP. What is the point in doing so if anybody can do as they want and get away with it without worries?

Anybody who didn't want to bother but still joined the game could have sent a general broadcast at the beginning of the game and declared enemy to everybody right away. Not against the rules, and a valid strategy.

I am all in favor for harsh punishment if someone break the 2 years exist clause.



STARS! Wiki
STARS! Wiki Français
I am on a hot streak... Literally.

Report message to a moderator

Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? Fri, 13 February 2009 13:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
craebild is currently offline craebild

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 568
Registered: December 2003
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
I don't think there should be any in-game consequence for violating the NAP - Other than the in-game message to all which the victim will surely send out, and a verification of the violation posted by AlexTheGreat here on the forum so those who doubt the accusation can see that it is true.

The backstabber would have to have a pretty powerful race to gain any allies after it is publicly known he is a backstabber.

Maybe one in-game consequence: A backstab verified by AlexTheGreat voids all treaties the backstabbing player has, so anyone can attack the backstabbing player without that being considered a backstab. While that technically also voids any obligations the backstabbing player has, a backstabbing player probably would not honour those obligations anyway, so that is no loss to the race they were obligated to.



Med venlig hilsen / Best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Christian Ræbild / Christian Raebild

Report message to a moderator

Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? Fri, 13 February 2009 20:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
AlexTheGreat is currently offline AlexTheGreat

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 661
Registered: May 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
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 Go to previous messageGo to next message
magic9mushroom is currently offline magic9mushroom

 
Commander

Messages: 1282
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? Fri, 13 February 2009 23:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
AlexTheGreat is currently offline AlexTheGreat

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 661
Registered: May 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
magic9mushroom wrote on Fri, 13 February 2009 22:56

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.


No doubt about the alliance size. There would indeed be a penalty.

The starting NAPs were simply meant as normal NAPs so I didn't envisage a penalty when I posted the game.

I'm still listening Arguing



Report message to a moderator

Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? Sat, 14 February 2009 00:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eagle of Fire

 
Lt. Commander

Messages: 809
Registered: December 2008
Location: GMT -5
Well, it all depends of your original intention. I got the impression from the start that you were hosting this game to force players to use diplomacy in this game. If it is not the case then whatever... But otherwise, what's the point in hosting a diplomatic game if everybody simply throw it down the drain?

Unless I'm missing something? Backstabbing people is not diplomacy for me. It's treason.



STARS! Wiki
STARS! Wiki Français
I am on a hot streak... Literally.

Report message to a moderator

Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? Sat, 14 February 2009 04:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Airny is currently offline Airny

 
Crewman 1st Class

Messages: 33
Registered: June 2008
Location: Germany
The idea of the NAP for me is that everybody has a 2 turns preparation time before getting into a war. Since most of the races would have NAPs after meeting each other it is not that unusual and makes things easier diplomatic wise, because you dont have to argue about the first version of an agreement.

Report message to a moderator

Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? Mon, 16 February 2009 02:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
AlexTheGreat is currently offline AlexTheGreat

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 661
Registered: May 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
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 02:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
neilhoward

 
Commander

Messages: 1112
Registered: April 2008
Location: SW3 & 10023
1

We don't need to add or change the rules after the game starts.

Report message to a moderator

Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? Mon, 16 February 2009 05:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
magic9mushroom is currently offline magic9mushroom

 
Commander

Messages: 1282
Registered: May 2008
AlexTheGreat wrote on Mon, 16 February 2009 18:01

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.




Ok. That's fine with me.

Report message to a moderator

Re: NAP: Who must you tell when ending it? Mon, 16 February 2009 06:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
AlexTheGreat is currently offline AlexTheGreat

 
Lieutenant

Messages: 661
Registered: May 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
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 Go to previous message
magic9mushroom is currently offline magic9mushroom

 
Commander

Messages: 1282
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

Previous Topic: Game over, postings in Game Stories
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat Aug 08 17:03:50 EDT 2020