| NAP Breaker or not? |
Fri, 17 February 2012 04:40  |
|
 Mac1 |
 | Chief Warrant Officer 2 |
Messages: 159
Registered: November 2008 | |
|
Like in title, i need Your advice about our situation.
From my perspective NAP is clearly broken, i play many other military MP games and in each such situation would be called as NAP breaking. But i dont have enough experience on this area in stars!.
Slimdragoon claims he did everything fine. So i need advice to solve it out. Here is the situation:
We have a simple NAP-5 treaty.
Mac (me) playing Undeads
Slim playing Dragonoids.
Dragonoids are at war with Psilons
Undeads are at war with Airstrip
I was preparing to attack another of Airstrip Planet, named Planet9, i was sweeping mines atm.
Then i receive an e-mail from Dragonoids that i can't attack planet for at least 5 turns beacuse he is using the planet as trading route to his front line with Psilons (it might be fair, but Dragonoids already have several other gates at Psilon border, so for me the reason was fake, but it's not about it).
I replied that I'm at war with Airstrip and i have a right to attack his planets anytime i want to and I warned him to move the fleets away. (he replied that he wont do it, but i didnt receive this email before generation).
I did attack the planet, killing as well some of dragonoid ships that were on orbit (not many but always something). Next turn Dragonoid attacked me at several fronts doing much damage, without any warning or information.
So what you think about that ?
He claims that i cant attack Airstrip planets, beacuse his fleet is there. And i did broke a NAP doing this. For me such logic is really unacceptable. If this is true, i can protect an ally by moving fleet to every his planet.
And what i really hate is that a player being on 1st place needs such tricks to kill another ...
Thanks for explanations, Mac
Edit: changing thread title.. i think. Ash
[Updated on: Wed, 22 February 2012 22:30] by Moderator
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is Slimdragoon a NAP breaker or not ? |
Fri, 17 February 2012 07:03  |
|
| goober |
 | Chief Warrant Officer 3 |
Messages: 175
Registered: December 2003
Location: +10 | |
|
| Mac1 wrote on Fri, 17 February 2012 21:03 |
Thanks Goober.
But what if i set orders to kill Airstrip and Dragonoid fleet did start fire and made my fleet kill it ?
|
Then they started the agression and you can choose not to cancel the NAP as it is "friendly fire":
"My apologies. My fleet only had orders to attack the Airstrip as you can see from the battleboard attack orders. Don't worry, we won't take it that you have deliberately broken our NAP. It was clearly a friendly fire accident you mistakenly caused."
You could also have been a bit more aggressive in your previous diplomacy.
For example. "We understand you want gate access. We'll make every effort to put one up as soon as we've cleared the planet so that you can return to normal business."
Personally, if they said no to this, I'd whip up a fleet that turn and gate it to their HW, with bombers, the very next turn after that because their diplomatic tactic is effectively preventing you from attacking an enemy while they can kill you freely. Now that strikes me as a form of aggression and gives you licence to do the same back with interest. Recall, they started the word play.
The same year your pre-emptive attack (justifiable back-stab) kills their HW, announce it to the universe and invite them to join in, providing them with the communications that led up to it. Put them on the diplomatic defensive too while you eviscerate them (helpful if you kill as many gates as you can too with multiple backstab strikes)
Then, when they complain in the Bar instead of you, it can be you smiling quietly to yourself, knowing that you utilised the diplomatic situation to do unto them as they intended to do unto you, but beat them to it.
Goober.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is Slimdragoon a NAP breaker or not ? |
Fri, 17 February 2012 09:49 |
|
|
|
If the Dragonoids can use the gates of the Airstrips, they must be either allied or at least have each other set to friends. This again triggered that the Dragonoids helped the Airstrips when they got attacked.
Having a NAP with one and attacking the ally/friend, is always tricky.
Goobers suggestion would had been a wise approach: to solve it diplomatically.
The other approach would be to make a clear cut: as soon as you go to war with an ally of the player you have a NAP with, cancel the NAP to avoid such muddy situations.
I guess you hadn't any agreement in your NAP concerning such a situation. So you had probably no right to demand the ships of the Dragonoids to leave the orbit of a planet. Without an agreement, the very correct thing would had been to make the conclusion that the NAP can't go on this way, to cancel it and then, after the 5 years cancel time, to attack the planet.
As I said, it's quite a muddy situation and due to this, I think neither of you can really claim that the other "broke" the NAP.
edit: typo
[Updated on: Fri, 17 February 2012 11:25] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is Slimdragoon a NAP breaker or not ? |
Fri, 17 February 2012 11:58 |
|
|
|
| Mac1 wrote on Fri, 17 February 2012 10:40 |
He claims that i cant attack Airstrip planets, beacuse his fleet is there. And i did broke a NAP doing this. For me such logic is really unacceptable. If this is true, i can protect an ally by moving fleet to every his planet.
|
True. It's obviously a loophole in your NAP-agreement.
So you can either try to add a clause to your NAP-agreement concerning such a situation or you need to cancel the NAP.
You asked for advice...
The advice would be:
a) Make only NAPs which include all members of the alliances.
or
b) If you make a NAP with only 1 member of an alliance, be aware of the complications which this might cause and include something pragmatic and "doable" into your NAP-agreement.
or
c) Cancel the NAP when you plan to attack a member of the alliance.
| Mac1 wrote on Fri, 17 February 2012 10:40 |
But i had a war with Airstrip since probably 20-30 years or so.
|
It's quite a surprise that such a situation occured not already before. Luck... or probably it was in the interest of the Dragonoids to let you first fight their own ally but now no longer.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is Slimdragoon a NAP breaker or not ? |
Fri, 17 February 2012 15:46 |
|
| Mac1 |
| Chief Warrant Officer 2 |
Messages: 159
Registered: November 2008 | |
|
| LittleEddie wrote on Fri, 17 February 2012 14:00 |
A & B have a NAP
NAP says we can ping each other with max of 1 X-ray, or something like that, Otherwise not to attack each other except for scouts, both standard clause in a NAP.
Now if player A has ship somewhere, anywhere.
And Player B knows that the ships are there.
Then Player B can not attack player A without breaking the NAP.
I don't see what's so hard about that. If Player B doesn't know the ships are there then it's friendly fire.
|
So i can put a small fleet to all planets of an ally (let's say psilons in our game) and some1 who I have NAP with (dragonoids) can't attack Psilons planet ?. All he can do is either breaking a NAP or canceling a NAP and wait 5 years ?
Sorry, but for me it's a BULL####.
I play many other military games and i never heard about similiar way to explain a NAP.
Ofcourse in perfect world all should be done diplomatically. Dragonoids can ask me to not attack planet, which he did.
I should warn Dragonoid that i might attack a planet and ask to move fleet away, which i did (and he did receive it before gen).
btw. some1 spoke about that I should put special clause in a NAP, saying about specific situation. Yes that would be great, but can every1 always predict everything ?
NAP was signed at the start of the game and was simple NAP5, the pact that usually most people take, without special lines.
And by NAP (non aggression pact) i assume not make any action that can harm other (but only him, not his friends/allies).
So when I'm attacking other player's planet I can't see how i am breaking NAP by this.
But Dragonoids trying to stop my attack are aggresive to me.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is Slimdragoon a NAP breaker or not ? |
Fri, 17 February 2012 19:00 |
|
|
|
| Mac1 wrote on Fri, 17 February 2012 15:10 |
Like in title, i need Your advice about our situation.
From my perspective NAP is clearly broken, i play many other military MP games and in each such situation would be called as NAP breaking. But i dont have enough experience on this area in stars!.
Slimdragoon claims he did everything fine. So i need advice to solve it out. Here is the situation:
We have a simple NAP-5 treaty.
Mac (me) playing Undeads
Slim playing Dragonoids.
Dragonoids are at war with Psilons
Undeads are at war with Airstrip
I was preparing to attack another of Airstrip Planet, named Planet9, i was sweeping mines atm.
Then i receive an e-mail from Dragonoids that i can't attack planet for at least 5 turns beacuse he is using the planet as trading route to his front line with Psilons (it might be fair, but Dragonoids already have several other gates at Psilon border, so for me the reason was fake, but it's not about it).
I replied that I'm at war with Airstrip and i have a right to attack his planets anytime i want to and I warned him to move the fleets away. (he replied that he wont do it, but i didnt receive this email before generation).
I did attack the planet, killing as well some of dragonoid ships that were on orbit (not many but always something). Next turn Dragonoid attacked me at several fronts doing much damage, without any warning or information.
So what you think about that ?
He claims that i cant attack Airstrip planets, beacuse his fleet is there. And i did broke a NAP doing this. For me such logic is really unacceptable. If this is true, i can protect an ally by moving fleet to every his planet.
And what i really hate is that a player being on 1st place needs such tricks to kill another ...
Thanks for explanations, Mac
|
Just read the first post and on the basis of only this information, you got the short end of the stick.
A person can't protect an ally's planet just by having his ships in orbit.
I'm curious though, will player a, allied to player b, attack player c who fires at player b? I need to check that ....
I know my minefields.. but I'm a chaff sweeper.
I used to curse when I got stuck in traffic... till I realised I AM traffic.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is Slimdragoon a NAP breaker or not ? |
Fri, 17 February 2012 19:02 |
|
|
|
| sprocket wrote on Fri, 17 February 2012 20:50 |
Thanks for the post on Slimdragoon's character.
I will put him on my lawyer list.
|
Lol.
I know my minefields.. but I'm a chaff sweeper.
I used to curse when I got stuck in traffic... till I realised I AM traffic.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is Slimdragoon a NAP breaker or not ? |
Fri, 17 February 2012 19:05 |
|
|
|
| Eagle of Fire wrote on Fri, 17 February 2012 23:54 |
....
I'd love to hear Slimdragon version of this story though. There is always two sides on a single coin.
|
I agree with EoF completely here.. And quite true.. I would love to hear slimdragons version, to figure out if he just took the opportunity to attack without bothering about the NAP exit clause, or if there was some other factor involved as well.
I know my minefields.. but I'm a chaff sweeper.
I used to curse when I got stuck in traffic... till I realised I AM traffic.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is Slimdragoon a NAP breaker or not ? |
Fri, 17 February 2012 23:54 |
|
|
|
| goober wrote on Sat, 18 February 2012 10:15 |
<snip>.
Unfortunately, Player B's communication allowed Player A to define player B's legitimate actions as aggression and Player B knew that it would be interpreted that way, making them the aggressor instead.
Beautiful statesmanship on Player A's part.
|
Agreed... But the follow up action of attacking in subsequent years without giving the 5 year notification was poor gamesmanship.
Of course ppl do consider backstabs and NAPs valid only to the letter and clauses agreed to, as valid stratagems.
I consider them the dark side and wud stay away from players who seem to subscribe to that logic... Any agreement I have with them would be only quasi-confirmed and I would be ready for a backstab or a reinterpretation anytime.
I know my minefields.. but I'm a chaff sweeper.
I used to curse when I got stuck in traffic... till I realised I AM traffic.Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
